Scarizzi v. Marinaki
T-403-94
Rothstein J.
8/12/94
9 pp.
Judicial review of Public Service Commission Appeal Board decision applicant's appointment not made in accordance with merit principle-Applicant scoring exactly pass mark on written test -- Respondent reviewing applicant's test, claiming test marked improperly and appealing appointment to Board -- Board changing award of marks to appellant with respect to one question -- Board not empowered to substitute its opinion with respect to candidate's assessment or examination for selection board's -- Board erring in law by substituting its opinion as to appropriateness of applicant's answer -- Opinion as to rightness or wrongness of answer exclusively that of selection board -- Board's role to ensure selection board adhering to merit principle in selection of candidates; Board's role not to ensure examinations properly marked -- Selective approach of remarking a few answers on examination of single candidate raising serious problem of inconsistency and may result more in departure from merit principle than in adherence to it-Board interfering with selection board decision only where decision obviously unreasonable as where marks not correctly added or objective answer clearly incorrect -- Applicant seeking costs from respondent pursuant to "special circumstances" under R. 1618 -- Fact applicant singled out from all other successful candidates and fact he did nothing to cause these proceedings constituting "special circumstances" -- Appeal Board process not means for disgruntled employee to cause difficulty for another employee -- Future cost award in similar circumstances may well be much higher than present sum of $1,500 -- Judicial review allowed -- Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 1618 (as enacted by SOR/92-43, s. 19).