Case information

Administrative law — Judicial review — Procedural fairness — Bias — Company submitting applications to programs offering assistance to businesses for the development of new technologies — Company’s applications for funding denied — Company filing petition for judicial review — Whether applications were reviewed in a transparent, impartial and fair manner — Whether administrative decision makers provided adequate reasons for rejection of applications — Whether applications were rejected for discriminatory reasons — Whether lower courts ignored material facts in striking petition for judicial review.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant, Nova-BioRubber Green Technologies Inc., is a company that researches processing technologies to develop hypoallergenic bio-latex from plants. Between 2018 and 2022, Nova submitted four applications to obtain funding from programs administered by the respondents, the National Research Council of Canada and Innovate BC. All four applications were denied.

In 2022, Nova filed a petition before the Supreme Court of British Columbia pursuant to the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 241. Nova alleged (1) negligence; (2) breach of public confidence and fiduciary duty; (3) breach of statutory duty with respect to the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11, and the Conflict of Interest Act, S.C. 2006, c. 9, s. 2; (4) betrayal of Canadian public interest and favouritism toward foreign competition; (5) breach of the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and (6) lack of transparency, fairness, and impartiality. Nova sought orders setting aside the respondents’ decisions and sending its applications for reconsideration. Nova also sought general damages, special damages, punitive damages, and interest.

The respondents filed separate applications requesting that the petition be struck in its entirety without leave to amend. The application judge struck the petition in its entirety. She concluded that Nova’s petition disclosed no reasonable claim that may be brought by petition and that the relief sought is unobtainable by way of petition. Moreover, she recognized that the Federal Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the judicial review of decisions of the National Research Council. The Court of Appeal dismissed Nova’s appeal of the application judge’s decision. It agreed with the application judge that none of the claims that could properly be brought by way of petition could succeed.