It is well-established (and counsel for the appellants do not deny) that common law rules of procedural fairness can be ousted by clear statutory language or by necessary implication (see Kane v. University of British Columbia, 1980 CanLII 10 (SCC),  1 S.C.R. 1105, 110 D.L.R. (3d) 311). In the case at bar, there is clearly no express language abrogating the participatory rights of third parties. However, as noted by the Judge, the Regulations do address explicitly the participatory rights of those directly affected by the licensing scheme. After providing several examples of such provisions at paragraph 52 of her Reasons for Judgment, she found that no similar participatory rights are afforded to strangers to the licensing process (Reasons for Judgment at para. 53, as reproduced above at para. 17).
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.