Young v. Saanich Police Department, 2003 BCSC 926 (CanLII).

Young v. Saanich Police Department, et al Page 68
arbitration proceedings are similar to judicial ones
and indeed disputes between landlord and tenant
would be in court but for the existence of this
legislative arbitration scheme; there is effectively
no internal appeal (the review process provided by
s. 59 of the Act applies only on a very limited
basis such as when new evidence has come to light
that was not available before the hearing); and the
outcome is highly important to the individuals
affected. The petitioners in this case have lived
in the community for many years, and the termination
of their tenancies will mean dislocation for them
and their families. I conclude that a high standard
of procedural fairness is required.
2003 BCSC 926 (CanLII)
I apply a similar standard of procedural fairness to the
hearings under review in the case at bar.
Reasonable Apprehension of Bias
[140] In their petition, Mr. and Mrs. Young set out the
basis for arguing a reasonable apprehension of bias at
paragraph 1(e), as follows:
(e) Three days before the August 15th hearing
commenced, or on August 12th, and unbeknownst then
to the Petitioner/Tenants or their Counsel, and
three days before the Petitioners were given copies,
the Arbitrator was presented and then read the whole
of the Respondent CRHC's case in several documents,
including "will-say" summaries of witnesses who did
not subsequently appear or which was in excess of
their actual testimony, and a detailed "chronology",
creating thereby a reasonable apprehension of bias
and cause for disqualification of the Arbitrator.