文章基本信息

标题：I CAN SEE CLEARLY NOW: VIDEOCONFERENCE HEARINGS AND THE LEGAL LIMIT ON HOW TRIBUNALS ALLOCATE RESOURCES
其他标题：I CAN SEE CLEARLY NOW: VIDEOCONFERENCE HEARINGS AND THE LEGAL LIMIT ON HOW TRIBUNALS ALLOCATE RESOURCES
本地全文：下载
作者：Lorne Sossin ; Zimra Yetnikoff
期刊名称：Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice
印刷版ISSN：0710-0841
出版年度：2007
卷号：25
期号：2
页码：247-272
DOI：10.22329/wyaj.v25i2.4614
出版社：University of Windsor
摘要：Videoconferencing has generated ambivalence in the legal community.Some have heralded its promise of unprecedented access to justice,especially for geographically remote communities. Others, however, havequestioned whether videoconferencing undermines fairness. The authorsexplore the implications of videoconferencing through the case studyof the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Tribunal, which is one of thebusiest adjudicative bodies in Canada. This analysis highlights concernsboth with videoconferencing in principle and in practice. While suchconcerns traditionally have been the province of public administration,the authors argue that a tribunal’s allocation of resources and thesuffi ciency of its budget are also core concerns of administrative law.Administrative law reaches beyond conventional doctrines of proceduralfairness on the one hand and substantive rationality on the other. Howthe legislature structures and funds decision-making bodies is not just amatter of political preference but also of legal suffi ciency. The commonlaw, the Charter of Rights, and unwritten constitutional principles suchas the rule of law and access to justice all provide potential constraintsboth on governments and tribunals as to the organization and conductof adjudicative hearings, especially in settings like the Landlord andTenant Tribunal, where the rights of vulnerable people are at stake.While a challenge to the videoconferencing practices of the Landlordand Tenant Tribunal has yet to be brought, the authors conclude thateventually the intersection of tribunal resources with the fairness andreasonableness of that tribunal’s decision-making will reach the courts.How the courts resolve these challenges may represent the next frontierof administrative law.La vidéoconférence a suscité de l’ambivalence au sein de la communautéjuridique. Certains ont proclamé sa promesse d’un accès sansprécédent à la justice, surtout pour les communautés géographiquementéloignées. D’autres, cependant, ont soulevé la question à savoir si lavidéoconférence mine l’équité. Les auteurs explorent les conséquencesde l’utilisation de la vidéoconférence en faisant une étude de cas duTribunal du logement de l’Ontario, un des organismes juridictionnelsles plus occupés au Canada. Cette analyse met en lumière despréoccupations en rapport avec la vidéoconférence en principe et enpratique. Quoique de telles préoccupations ont traditionnellement été du ressort de l’administration publique, les auteurs soutiennent quel’allocation des ressources par un tribunal et la suffi sance de son budgetsont également des préoccupations centrales du droit administratif.Le droit administratif va au delà des doctrines conventionnellesd’équité procédurale d’une part et de la rationalité substantive d’autrepart. La façon dont le législateur organise et fi nance les organismesdécideurs n’est pas simplement question de préférence politique maisaussi de suffi sance légale. Le common law, la Charte des droits etles principes constitutionnels non écrits tels que l’autorité de la loiet l’accès à la justice imposent tous des contraintes potentielles auxgouvernements et aux tribunaux quant à l’organisation d’audiencesadjudicatives et la façon de les mener, surtout dans un cadre tel que leTribunal du logement de l’Ontario, où sont en jeu les droits de gensvulnérables. Quoique les pratiques de vidéoconférence du Tribunaldu logement de l’Ontario n’aient pas encore été contestées, les auteursconcluent qu’éventuellement la conjoncture des ressources du tribunalet de l’équité et l’aspect raisonnable du processus de décision de cetribunal va parvenir à la cour. La façon dont les cours règleront cescontestations pourrait devenir le prochain domaine d’exploration dudroit administratif.*.
其他摘要：Videoconferencing has generated ambivalence in the legal community.Some have heralded its promise of unprecedented access to justice,especially for geographically remote communities. Others, however, havequestioned whether videoconferencing undermines fairness. The authorsexplore the implications of videoconferencing through the case studyof the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Tribunal, which is one of thebusiest adjudicative bodies in Canada. This analysis highlights concernsboth with videoconferencing in principle and in practice. While suchconcerns traditionally have been the province of public administration,the authors argue that a tribunal’s allocation of resources and thesuffi ciency of its budget are also core concerns of administrative law.Administrative law reaches beyond conventional doctrines of proceduralfairness on the one hand and substantive rationality on the other. Howthe legislature structures and funds decision-making bodies is not just amatter of political preference but also of legal suffi ciency. The commonlaw, the Charter of Rights, and unwritten constitutional principles suchas the rule of law and access to justice all provide potential constraintsboth on governments and tribunals as to the organization and conductof adjudicative hearings, especially in settings like the Landlord andTenant Tribunal, where the rights of vulnerable people are at stake.While a challenge to the videoconferencing practices of the Landlordand Tenant Tribunal has yet to be brought, the authors conclude thateventually the intersection of tribunal resources with the fairness andreasonableness of that tribunal’s decision-making will reach the courts.How the courts resolve these challenges may represent the next frontierof administrative law.