What is the test for giving an inmate a detailed description of all the wrong doings of the accused?

Further, it is also important to consider the nature of the decision in the internal setting of the prison. As Marceau J.A. noted in Gallant v. Canada, [1989] 3 F.C. 329 (Gallant), all administrative decisions affecting inmates in prison institutions should not be dealt with in the same way. A decision on transfer is administrative in nature, taken to maintain good order in the penitentiary and ensure protection for the public. As such, procedural fairness does not require that the applicant have as many details as in the case of a disciplinary charge. At paragraph 28 of his judgment Marceau J.A. said the following: In such a case [a case of transfer], there would be no basis for requiring that the inmate be given as many particulars of all the wrong doings of which he may be suspected. Indeed, in the former case, what has to be verified is the very commission of the offence and the person involved should be given the fullest opportunity to convince of his innocence; in the latter case, it is merely the reasonableness and the seriousness of the belief on which the decision would be based and the participation of the person involved has to be rendered meaningful for that but nothing more. In the situation we are dealing with here, guilt was not what had to be confirmed, it was whether the information received from six different sources was sufficient to raise a valid concern and warrant the transfer. Application of law to facts of case at bar