3.21: Limit on questioning
3.22: Evidence on judicial review

Case Summary

The Applicant, Dr. Abdulghafoor, applied for Judicial Review of a decision that ended her enrollment in a clinical placement with the University of Calgary. The Applicant was enrolled in in residency program prior to a committee decision that concluded she had not satisfactorily completed her probation period in the program.

Justice Jeffrey considered the admissibility of additional Affidavit evidence. The Applicant filed and served an Affidavit, and the Respondents challenged its admissibility. The Respondents took the position that Affidavit evidence is generally not admissible in a Judicial Review and that the Applicant’s Affidavit did not fall into an exception to this general rule. In determining the admissibility of the Affidavit, Justice Jeffrey considered Rule 3.21 and 3.22. Specifically with regards to Rule 3.21, Justice Jeffrey highlighted that the Applicant complied with the Rule by obtaining a prior Order permitting the Applicant to file Affidavit evidence on the conditions that the Respondents had the opportunity to question on the Affidavit and challenge its admissibility.

Justice Jeffrey also specifically highlighted Rule 3.22(d), Respondents contested the admissibility of the Affidavit on the grounds the Applicant had failed to display a complete lack of evidence or a breach of natural justice. The Applicant’s position was that the Affidavit provided support for the allegations of breach of procedural fairness. Justice Jeffrey concluded that in circumstances where the Applicant challenges the process followed by the decision maker, it may be necessary to allow additional evidence. As the nature of the Applicant’s allegations related to breach of procedural fairness, Justice Jeffrey admitted portions of the Affidavit.

View CanLII Details