So I agree that a R. 18A application can result in a chambers judge properly giving judgment after making findings of fact on contradictory affidavit evidence. But he should only do so where he is sure that he is right, and when he is sure that the normal processes of trial could not possibly make any difference to the result. That is the only basis for decision that is consistent with the denial of a trial and the denial of a right to cross-examine witnesses. Those denials would be a breach of natural justice except in cases where they could make no difference to the result. Proceedings in court must be at the most rigorous end of the spectrum of natural justice discussed by Dickson J. in Martineau v. Matsqui Inst. Disciplinary Bd., 1979 CanLII 184 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 602 at 628, 13 C.R. (3d) 1, 15 C.R. (3d) 315, 50 C.C.C. (2d) 353, 106 D.L.R. (3d) 385, 30 N.R. 119.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.