Content area
Full Text
Preservation of the rule of law requires that discretionary administrative decisions respect the Charter. But how should those decisions incorporate Charter values or rights? Moreover, how does the concept of proportionality square with the unified theory of reasonableness? This paper examines the Dore framework and subsequent jurisprudence interpreting Charter values, and the concept of proportionality. Ultimately, the authors conclude that the Dore; framework should be refined. Presently, the scope and meaning of Charter values are contested, the Dore; framework is unclear, and the concept of proportionality lacks harmony with reasonableness. The authors propose a revised framework that abandons focus on values and proportionality and aligns the framework in Dore; with the pillars of administrative law outlined in Vavilov.
Le maintien de la primaute du droit requiert que les decisions administratives de nature discretionnaire soient conformes a la Charte. Mais comment les valeurs et les droits consacres par la Charte sintegrent-ils a ces decisions? En outre, comment la notion de proportionnalite sarrime-t-elle avec la plus recente theorie de la raisonnabilite? Lautrice et lauteur etudient le cadre danalyse etabli dans larret Dore; ainsi que la jurisprudence subsequente traitant des valeurs de la Charte, et finalement la notion de proportionnalite. En definitive, ils concluent que le cadre danalyse elabore dans Dore devrait etre precise. JÍ lheure actuelle, la definition et la portee des valeurs consacrees par la Charte ne font pas consensus, le cadre danalyse etabli dans Dore; est ambigu et la notion de proportionnalite sharmonise mal avec celle de la raisonnabilite. Lautrice et lauteur proposent un cadre danalyse révisé qui met de cote toute consideration de la proportionnalite ou des valeurs fondees sur la Charte et qui, en consequence, reconcilie le cadre danalyse qui avait été etabli dans larrét Dore avec les piliers de droit administratif definis dans larret Vavilov.
1. INTRODUCTION
The idea that administrative decisions must respect the Charter1 is nothing new or controversial. Ensuring that discretionary administrative decisions comply with the Charter is crucial to public confidence in the administrative state as a whole, access to justice, and preservation of the rule of law. However, the framework for courts and administrative decision makers to ensure Charter compliance of administrative discretion is conceptually challenging.
The Supreme Court of Canada's most recent attempt at addressing...