License Lost: Court Rejects Daycare Operator’s Appeal

Late delivery of notice of contraventions of legislative regime does not result in breach of procedural fairness, if no breaches of procedural fairness occasioned by late delivery of the decision.

Administrative law – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Natural justice – Health authorities

Adlani v. Medical Health Officer (Fraser Health Authority), [2025] B.C.J. No. 128, British Columbia Court of Appeal, January 24, 2025, H. Groberman, N. Iyer and W.P. Riley JJ.A.

The appellant operated a home daycare. Investigations resulted in findings of contraventions of the Community Care and Assisted Living Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 75.

As a result of those contraventions, a licencing officer-imposed conditions on the appellant’s licence to operate a daycare. These conditions included a prohibition on providing daycare for school-age children and a requirement to complete supplementary professional training. Under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act, a licensee must be given 30 days’ notice of conditions being imposed along with written reasons for the conditions. The appellant’s position was the notice was not provided within the time required under the legislative regime, but approximately three weeks later.

On appeal to the Community Care and Assisted Living Appeal Board, the Appeal Board found the evidence did not allow it to determine whether the decision had been delivered within 30 days.

On judicial review, the chambers judge found that even if the decision was not delivered within 30 days, there was no denial of procedural fairness.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The Court of Appeal found that late delivery of the decision did not have the effect of making it a nullity. At most, it could have delayed the enforceability of conditions. The appellant’s right to procedural fairness has not been compromised by the alleged late delivery of the licencing officer’s decision. In particular:

The Court of Appeal held the date of notice of the decision did not matter, because there were no breaches of procedural fairness occasioned by late delivery of the decision.

This case was digested by Joel A. Morris of Harper Grey LLP and first published in the LexisNexis® Harper Grey Administrative Law Netletter and the Harper Grey Administrative Law Newsletter. If you would like to discuss this case further, please feel free to contact him directly at [email protected].