Does the superior court have jurisdiction to hear non-judicial review matters arising from disputes in the academic sphere?

There has been considerable discussion in the jurisprudence in relation to the degree of appropriate involvement of a superior court in non-judicial review matters emanating from disputes in the academic sphere. The accompanying debate has often given rise to unduly categorical discussions and determinations about jurisdiction. These discussions and determinations often turn on the relevant but stark question: does the court have jurisdiction or not? This approach and reliance upon jurisdiction as the determinative part of any connected analysis, appears increasingly less helpful and does not capture what is a more nuanced evolution in the jurisprudence. While the practical result of most non-judicial review cases may suggest that there remains a well-established reflex on the part of superior courts to defer to the academy’s administrative and appellate processes, it is erroneous to suggest that the superior court has no jurisdiction. At the very least, it has, because of its inherent jurisdiction, a concurrent jurisdiction with the university. The inherent jurisdiction of a superior court is, after all, limited only by express language in a statute or a contractual provision. See Jaffer v. York University, 2010 ONCA 654, 268 O.A.C. 338.