In an Aug. 6 decision, the Nunavut Court of Justice ruled that the Legal Services Board of Nunavut owed Alison Crowe procedural fairness when deciding whether to reinstate her to its roster of private lawyers who take criminal legal-aid files. The court found the board did not give her adequate notice of its concerns or a chance to respond before refusing her application. It returned the application to the board for reconsideration, with Crowe’s responding materials to be considered. Source↗

The ruling is not a finding that Crowe must be returned to the panel. The court declined to order reinstatement or damages, and the underlying concerns that led to the refusal were not decided on their merits. The court record lists costs to the successful applicant. Source↗

The panel is part of Nunavut’s legal-aid system. The Board says private panel lawyers supplement staff lawyers, including for court circuits and complex cases, while its clinics operate in Iqaluit, Rankin Inlet and Cambridge Bay. Source↗

The decision confirms that the Board’s choices about who may join or rejoin its criminal panel can be reviewed by a court. That matters because panel lawyers are part of the system providing publicly funded criminal defence services in a territory with small legal-service capacity and regular circuit courts.

The court’s remedy is narrow but practical: before making another decision in this case, the Board must use a fairer process. Its published panel policy says the Board aims to maintain a roster of private lawyers and assign work fairly, transparently and accountably. Source↗

The Legal Services Board must reconsider Crowe’s application. As of Sept. 15, Atiilu News Desk found no public record of the reconsideration outcome. The Board could approve the application or refuse it again after a process that addresses the fairness problems identified by the court.

Decision: Alison Crowe v Legal Services Board of Nunavut, 2026 NUCJ 15.

Decision date: Aug. 6, 2026.

Court finding: the Board breached its duty of procedural fairness in refusing the reinstatement application.

Remedy: reconsideration by the Board with Crowe’s responding materials considered; no court-ordered reinstatement or damages.

Status: the underlying panel application remains unresolved.