Administrative Law Conference 2026

Course Chairs
Justice Karrie A. Wolfe — Supreme Court of BC, Victoria
Kaitlyn Chewka — Lovett Westmacott, Victoria

About the Course Chairs
Justice Karrie Wolfe graduated from the University of Victoria Faculty of Law in 2004. She articled with the Legal Services Branch of the BC Ministry of Attorney General and was called to the BC bar in 2005. Justice Wolfe spent the majority of her career as a barrister with the Ministry of Attorney General, specializing in constitutional and administrative law. She appeared at all levels of court in BC and at the Supreme Court of Canada. Her public law expertise engaged issues such as safe injection sites, free speech in elections, environmental regulation, and minority language education rights. She also held various supervisory roles and wrote constitutional opinions. Justice Wolfe was appointed King's Counsel in 2023. In February 2024, Justice Wolfe was appointed to the Supreme Court of BC.

Justice Wolfe is a member of the editorial board and a contributing author to CLEBC's Administrative Law Practice Manual. She has also been a frequent presenter at various legal education programs, and regularly volunteers as a practice judge for moots and as a guest lecturer at UVic's Faculty of Law, primarily in administrative law and advocacy. Justice Wolfe has been actively involved in community theatre for decades.

Kaitlyn Chewka is a partner with the firm Lovett Westmacott. Prior to joining Lovett Westmacott, Kaitlyn was legal counsel with the Ministry of Attorney General's Constitutional and Administrative Law Section.

Kaitlyn provides advice to various administrative decision-makers and regularly acts as counsel on judicial review applications and any resulting appeals. Kaitlyn is also an Adjunct Professor at the University of Victoria where she teaches administrative law and regularly lectures on the topics of civil procedure, criminal procedure, advocacy, ethics, and energy law. She is also a co-coach for the University of Victoria's Wilson moot team, which focuses on appellate advocacy skills.

Faculty
Justice Nitya Iyer — BC Court of Appeal, Vancouver
Justice David M. Masuhara — Supreme Court of BC, Vancouver
Paul Daly — University Research Chair in Administrative Law & Governance, University of Ottawa, Ottawa
Alandra K. Harlingten — Lovett Westmacott, Victoria
Graeme Keirstead, KC — Deputy Registrar and Chief Legal Counsel, College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC, Vancouver
Angela R. Westmacott, KC — Lovett Westmacott, Victoria
Terri-Lynn Williams Davidson, KC (Gid7ahl-Gudsllaay Lalaxaaygans Gaadal-dyas) —White Raven Law Corporation, Surrey

Click here for full faculty bios

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Please Contact Customer Service to order.

British Columbia Administrative Law Practice Manual

Strategies for effective administrative law advocacy

This publication is essential for: Lawyers, decision-makers, and judges whose work involves federal or BC administrative law decision-making

Current to: May 1, 2023

Administrative law is complex and requires specialized knowledge. British Columbia Administrative Law Practice Manual offers you a guide to navigating administrative law and procedure with advice on fundamental administrative law concepts, case preparation and advocacy, the role of evidence and parties, and the process for reviews and appeals. Covering decision-makers and courts at both federal and provincial levels, this manual provides access to sample forms annotated with commentary and a curated bibliography of other useful administrative law resources.

With this resource, you will be able to:

• understand what makes for effective administrative law advocacy and drafting
• more confidently handle administrative decision-makers and unrepresented parties
• avoid common administrative law practice pitfalls

Order today and deepen your knowledge of administrative law principles and practice! View a sample from the book.

Highlights of the 2023 Update include:

• post-Vavilov developments in standard of review and procedural fairness jurisprudence at SCC and below, impact on lower authorities
• SCC: new correctness category in context of concurrent first-instance jurisdiction between courts and administrative bodies
• SCC: institutional role of interveners
• BCCA: new correctness category in context of jurisdictional boundaries between administrative decision-makers and legislative bodies
• FCA: development in the test for intervention at the Federal Court
• expansion of test for legal threshold for standing
• increasing prevalence of appointment of amici curiae
• JRPA amendment to enable judicial review of Indigenous governing bodies when consent agreements reached for joint decision-making

• administrative decision-making is characterized by its enormous diversity, including the type of decision-maker, the decision-making process, and the resources and workload of the decision-making body
• administrative tribunals were created to make decisions faster, more cost-effectively and with less formality than courts
• yet courts are assessing administrative decisions against increasingly complex legal standards, for example, robust reasonableness, Charter values, and statutory interpretation
• how will judicial expectations of administrative decisions affect the ability of administrative decision-making bodies to fulfill the purposes for which they were created?

• clarity on the constitutional foundations of judicial review
• adequate alternative remedies as barriers to judicial review
• judicial responses to delay in administrative tribunals
• regulatory searches and seizures in the digital age
• who are the decision-makers in a regulatory agency?

• recent developments of interest in BC administrative law 
• the interpretation and application of recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions of interest by BC courts
• topics will include a range of issues, such as preliminary matters, procedural fairness and substantive law developments, as well as updates on cases discussed last year

• discussion of common issues and challenges that arise both for and before statutory decision-makers and strategies to address them, such as:
  • dealing with self-represented parties
  • common procedural fairness issues (e.g., never-ending extension requests, non-compliance with rules, last minute adjournment requests)
  • writing clear reasons (necessary versus optional components, what do participants need to feel heard, what to avoid)
  • combatting the realities of systemic backlogs
• what can counsel appearing before tribunals do to better assist statutory decision-makers? (how better preparation can increase the chances of a faster decision)
• practical tips for counsel appearing before tribunals, counsel advising tribunals, and tribunal members themselves

• overview of decision-making and structures in Indigenous legal orders
  • historical decision-making structures in Indigenous legal orders
  • the re-emergence of Indigenous decision-making in contemporary administrative decision-making models in Canada
    • natural resource-based shared decision-making models
    • Indigenous Nation-led decision-making bodies
• the example of the Haida experience: the theory, the challenges, and the way forward
  • the provincial resource-based "Solutions Table" and the Haida Gwaii Management Council
  • shared federal decision-making in the context of Gwaii Haanas
  • looking forward: transitioning to fully nation-led decision-making models reflecting Haida Title and Haida Governance
• future possibilities—lessons and reflections from Haida Gwaii for implementing Indigenous jurisdiction in broader administrative law

• as Artificial Intelligence (AI) transforms the legal practice, and affects the work of courts and administrative tribunals, it is important for all stakeholders to develop a "vision for the future state"
• what elements could shape the processes, procedures, and decision-making models, and therefore influence the role of AI in future?
• should the conversation shift from "technology adoption" to "institutional design" and "the future of administrative justice"?
• what guidelines are being adopted and developed by the courts regarding the use of AI, and what implications might they have for judicial review of administrative decisions?