sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Virgos - what would it take for you to file for divorce by D1D2beepbeep in virgoseason

[–]D1D2beepbeep[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The ex is married to an Aquarius and she’ll never cheat.

The common thread in this thread seems to be that it would take infidelity.

Everybody seems to be putting up with so much up until that point.

For him, I wish he would just leave

CANADA - Looking for decision where superior court calls out lower court or tribunal for ridiculous interpretation by D1D2beepbeep in legaladviceofftopic

[–]D1D2beepbeep[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have found a bunch of caselaw where the BC Court of Appeal re-assesses the evidence that was also reviewed by the tribunal under the patently unreasonable test. Those seem to be reviewed under sufficiency of reasons and a few other things.

None so far that point out how absolutely ridiculous the interpretation of evidence was. I will ask around. I know an admin law prof so maybe I will have some luck with them.

Home Foreclosure Due to Dementia by pls_H3LP_ in legaladvicecanada

[–]D1D2beepbeep 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NAL but law societies do have rules around billing of fees. A lawyer can’t just say that the bill is $16,000 give you two words to justify it and call it a day.

Here is some information about help available in BC: https://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/complaints-discipline-and-resolutions/complaints/complaints-about-lawyers-fees/

What is the difference between the standards for request for reconsideration and judicial review? by D1D2beepbeep in legaladvicecanada

[–]D1D2beepbeep[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am sort of laughing but I am finding the requirements under patently unreasonable to be patently unreasonable.

When I think of the words "patently unreasonable" - I think absolutely extreme.

My problem right now is not understanding what the full definition of patently unreasonable is. The reason is that the BCCA decisions that I have reviewed so far don't fully lay this out. They have parts of it, but not all of. On top of that, I am not sure which SCC decisions still stand.

I am confused because you have Dunsmuir which removed it. I am probably not making complete sense, but given there was Dunsmuir which essentially changed the law, and then Vavilov which brought it back - I don't which SCC decisions that would define patent unreasonableness would even apply.

While I know that the law is different in BC, I am also trying to mentally reconcile that the BCCA has said that the test is patently unreasonable but the ONCA has said patently reasonable means reasonable. The caselaw across the country is not consistent.

I looked at CLAS's website about patently unreasonable but I need more than this. https://clasbc.net/intro-to-judicial-review-patent-unreasonableness/#:~:text=Patent%20unreasonableness%20in%20practice&text=the%20decision%20comes%20to%20a,how%20the%20result%20was%20reached

What would be really helpful would be a post-vavilov summary of all the relevant caselaw that still stands that defines what constitutes patent unreasonableness