The Goal of Administrative Justice System Reform
A System comprised of Adjudicative Tribunals that are expert, optimally competent and implicitly independent
Admired on all sides for the impartiality and quality of their decisions
Respected for the fairness, fitness, proportionality, and timeliness of their process
Originally launched in March 2013 in alignment with the publication of Ellis’s book, Unjust by Design, and redesigned and refreshed in 2019, this website’s aim is to foster discussion and provoke action concerning the issues in Canada’s administrative justice systems – the issues which Unjust by Design addresses, of course, but also generally.
Anyone with a stake or interest in the administrative justice system or in any of its adjudicative tribunals is welcome to participate. Just click on the “Comment” button at the end of each posted article.
Ellis’s Latest Posts
To view all posts in Ellis’s Current Blog, click here.
In a recent Lawyer’s Daily article by John Schofield, reference was made to a U.K/ study that established that oral hearings were 2.5 times more likely to produces a favourable result for claimants than a written hearing.
New Sheriff in Town There is a new sheriff in town – an organization just getting itself up and running called Tribunal Watch Ontario. It has emerged in response to the Ford government’s ferocious and devastating attack on Ontario’s system … Tribunal Watch Ontario Read More »
On the Canadian Council of Administrative Tribunals website (ccat-ctac.org) one now finds an invitation to tribunals to participate in a Department of Justice pilot project designed to examine how Federal administrative tribunals measure up against a Tribunal Excellence framework that … Now this is really interesting – A Framework of…
Notwithstanding the pandemic, It is still time to speak straight about the Ford Government’s abuse of our justice system beginning with 400 tribunal judges fired without cause.
Looking back on the 2008 UofT Symposium on the Future of Administrative Justice and comparing the hopeful presentations and discussions at that Symposium, as they appear in Lorne Sossin’s detailed Report, with the “Future” as we are now seeing it in Ontario, cannot help but leave one discouraged and angry.
Oral hearings work better not because sad stories undermine an adjudicator’s objectivity but because oral hearings always produce more information.