Michael Wilson v. Environmental Appeal Board

File Number:
BCJ 1949

Decision Date: June 20, 1995

Court: S.C.B.C., Quijano, J.

Cite: Cranbrook No. 6018

The issue in this judicial review was whether Mr. Wilson (the “petitioner”) delivered his notice of appeal with respect to a decision of the Deputy Director of Wildlife within the thirty-day limitation period set out in s. 103 of the Wildlife Act. The petitioner maintained that the limitation period with respect to appealing a decision received by way of registered mail begins to run on the fourteenth day after it is mailed and not on the date the notice is signed for upon receipt.

Section 103(3.1) provides that the minister may give notice of a decision of the director by personal service on the person affected or by sending notice of the decision by registered mail to the last known address of the person affected. In the case of service by mail, notice will be deemed to have been given on the fourteenth day after it is mailed. Section 103(3.2) of the Act provides a right of appeal but notice of this intention must be provided in writing and served on the director not less than 30 days after the person appealing is served or is deemed to have been served with notice of the decision being appealed.

The Court found that the proper interpretation of s. 103 requires that the limitation period for the purpose of launching an appeal starts running the date the notice is physically delivered to the recipient or, in the case of sending notice of the decision by registered mail, fourteen days from the day the notice is deposited with Canada Post. The Court therefore rejected the interpretation of s. 103(3.2) with respect to a notice served by registered mail that the date of receipt on which the notice is signed for triggers the running of the limitation period. The application was allowed.