HOOKENSON v ALBERTA, 2018 ABQB 198
3.22: Evidence on judicial review
Hookenson applied for Judicial Review of a Decision of the Chair of the Criminal Injuries Review Board (the “Board”) which upheld a Decision refusing Hookenson benefits under the Victims of Crime Financial Benefits Program.
Gates J. addressed an objection made by the Respondent, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, to Hookenson’s Affidavit which contained new evidence in support of the Application. The Respondent argued that the Court’s receipt of new affidavit evidence did not meet one of the exceptions set out in Rule 3.22. Justice Gates noted that Rule 3.22 allows the Court to consider: the record of proceedings under review; a transcript of questioning; anything permitted by any other Rule or an enactment; and any other evidence permitted by the Court. Gates J. referred to recent jurisprudence and confirmed that there are three exceptions to the general rule that new evidence is not permitted on a Judicial Review hearing: (i) where new evidence is permitted in order to establish a breach of natural justice not apparent on the record; (ii) to provide background information in order to establish standing; and (iii) if no transcript of the proceeding in issue exists.
Hookenson had conceded in the course of argument that the Affidavit was not properly before the Court. Justice Gates therefore gave the Affidavit no weight, and dismissed the Application.View CanLII Details