R-6.1 - Act respecting the Régie des alcools, des courses et des jeux

Full text
37. Subject to any contrary provision of law, the board may review or revoke any decision it has rendered and in respect of which no appeal has been brought before the Administrative Tribunal of Québec
(1)  when a new fact is discovered which, if it had been known in due time, might have justified a different decision;
(2)  where the applicant or an interested party was unable, for reasons considered sufficient, to present observations;
(3)  where a substantive or procedural defect is likely to invalidate the decision.
In cases to which subparagraph 3 of the first paragraph applies, the decision must be reviewed or revoked by a person other than the person who rendered it.
The board shall review a decision referred to in section 32.1.1 if the person concerned applies therefor within 10 days of notification. The board shall, in such a case, proceed expeditiously and may suspend execution of the decision.
1993, c. 39, s. 37; 1997, c. 51, s. 60; 1997, c. 43, s. 576; 2001, c. 77, s. 2.
37. Subject to any contrary provision of law, the board may review or revoke any decision it has rendered and in respect of which no appeal has been brought before the Administrative Tribunal of Québec
(1)  when a new fact is discovered which, if it had been known in due time, might have justified a different decision;
(2)  where the applicant or an interested party was unable, for reasons considered sufficient, to present observations;
(3)  where a substantive or procedural defect is likely to invalidate the decision.
In cases to which subparagraph 3 of the first paragraph applies, the decision must be reviewed or revoked by a person other than the person who rendered it.
The board shall review a decision referred to in the second paragraph of section 32.1 if the person concerned applies therefor within 10 days of notification. The board shall, in such a case, proceed expeditiously and may suspend execution of the decision.
1993, c. 39, s. 37; 1997, c. 51, s. 60; 1997, c. 43, s. 576.
37. Subject to any contrary provision of law, the board may review or revoke any decision it has rendered and from which an appeal has not been brought
(1)  when a new fact is discovered which, if it had been known in due time, might have justified a different decision;
(2)  where the applicant or an interested party was unable, for reasons considered sufficient, to present observations;
(3)  where a substantive or procedural defect is likely to invalidate the decision.
In cases to which subparagraph 3 of the first paragraph applies, the decision must be reviewed or revoked by a person other than the person who rendered it.
The board shall review a decision referred to in the second paragraph of section 32.1 if the person concerned applies therefor within 10 days of notification. The board shall, in such a case, proceed expeditiously and may suspend execution of the decision.
1993, c. 39, s. 37; 1997, c. 51, s. 60; 1997, c. 43, s. 576.
37. Subject to any contrary provision of law, the board may review or revoke any decision it has rendered and from which an appeal has not been brought
(1)  when a new fact is discovered which, if it had been known in due time, might have justified a different decision;
(2)  where a party was unable, for reasons considered sufficient, to present observations;
(3)  where a substantive or procedural defect is likely to invalidate the decision.
In cases to which subparagraph 3 of the first paragraph applies, the decision must be reviewed or revoked by a person other than the person who rendered it.
The board shall review a decision referred to in the second paragraph of section 32.1 if the person concerned applies therefor within 10 days of notification. The board shall, in such a case, proceed expeditiously and may suspend execution of the decision.
1993, c. 39, s. 37; 1997, c. 51, s. 60.
37. Subject to any contrary provision of law, the board may review or revoke any decision it has rendered and from which an appeal has not been brought
(1)  when a new fact is discovered which, if it had been known in due time, might have justified a different decision;
(2)  where a party was unable, for reasons considered sufficient, to be heard;
(3)  where a substantive or procedural defect is likely to invalidate the decision.
In cases to which subparagraph 3 of the first paragraph applies, the decision must be reviewed or revoked by a person other than the person who rendered it.
1993, c. 39, s. 37.