Selecting Standards of Review on Statutory Appeals: A Major Change from Vavilov Garnering Minimal Attention but Having Significant Theoretical and Practical Implications

Although the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov has garnered attention for its simplification of standard of review analysis, often overlooked is the impact the decision had regarding statutory appeals: that selection of the standard of review on statutory appeals is now governed by the Housen v. Nikolaisen framework. This article describes the substantial impact this change has had in jurisdictions where statutory appeals are a prominent method of judicial review, using Saskatchewan as an example. The article explores the implications that Vavilov’s treatment of statutory appeals has had on administrative law theory and practice, emphasizing the impact of questions of law on statutory appeals being reviewed on the standard of correctness.