What is the “standard of review”?

The “standard of review” is the test the court applies to decide if it can give a remedy. Usually, the remedy is to set aside a tribunal’s decision.

For the BC Human Rights Tribunal, the tests are set out in section 59 of the Administrative Tribunals Act.

There are four tests. The test depends on the kind of question the tribunal is answering.

1. “Correctness”: if the tribunal is answering a question about its powers (called “jurisdiction”) or what the Human Rights Code means, the court can give a remedy if it decides if the tribunal was not correct
2. “Unreasonableness”: if the tribunal is finding a fact after a hearing, the court can only give a remedy if there is no evidence to support the finding of fact or if the finding of fact is unreasonable
3. “Patent unreasonableness”: if the tribunal is making a “discretionary decision” (described below), the court can only give a remedy if the decision was “patently unreasonable”. Most of the tribunal’s decisions are discretionary.
4. “Unfairness”: this applies only to the tribunal’s process. The court can give a remedy if the tribunal’s process was unfair.

This page will help you understand what kind of question the tribunal decided and what test applies:

• Discretionary decisions
• Findings of fact
• Questions where the tribunal must be correct
• Procedural fairness