federal court of canada decisions

Date of decision: October 19, 2016. Professor Yeager is a public criminologist. The OIC suggested that the applicant file a request with CSC. Decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal and other courts are included. She has not demonstrated that anything other than non-confidential aggregate data will be publicly disclosed when the Study is complete. Section 41 – Review by Federal Court The Federal Court granted Calian’s application and both the Attorney General of Canada and the Information Commissioner appealed. 2007 - 2021-10-21. However, the purpose of the Study is to compile and analyze statistics related to the health and welfare of Canadians, so it complies with the purpose of the censuses (supporting policy development of governments and data users in the private sector) and with Statistics Canada’s mandate to collect, analyze and publish statistical information. The interpretation of section 8 of the ATIA does not fall into any of the four categories that rebut the presumption of reasonableness. Explore the Court: Judges of the Court | Role of the Court … The Court therefore held that the correct interpretation of the disclosure clause, consistent not only with its clear wording but also with the general scheme and purpose of the ATIA together with basic principles of administrative law, must be to permit disclosure not only within government but also more broadly to the public at large. Contents. Resource Formats: HTML; Open Information … the information must be secret in an absolute or relative sense (i.e. He made a June 7, 2007 access to information request to the Department of PSEPC for certain documents related to the then newly announced Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) Independent Review Panel. Federal Court Decision Summaries 37A, 2013 Archived Federal Court Decision Summaries 36A, 2012-13 Archived Federal Court Decision Summaries 35A, 2011-12 Archived The Court also lacks the authority to consider the wisdom of government document retention policies. By ticking the box, you acknowledge that you have read our Privacy Policy and that you consent to our using, keeping, processing and sharing personal data in accordance with the Privacy Policy. Unit Information: [URL], Unit Information: Date of decision: December 14, 2017. 3. Please find out more about our Cookie Policy here. decision in the "Case Number" box. We filed an appeal to the Tax Court of Canada. Found insideIn The Last Days of New Paris, China Miéville entwines true historical events and people with his daring, uniquely imaginative brand of fiction, reconfiguring history and art into something new. “Beauty will be convulsive. . . .” 1941. 453, 27 F.T.R. The application was dismissed. Statistics Canada is a statistical agency with a mandate to collect, analyze, abstract and publish statistical information related to the social and general activities and conditions of Canadians. The Chief of Statistics did not change the law or upset the balance that Parliament and the Supreme Court of Canada have said is required in these situations. Following receipt of the Reply, we submitted a settlement offer explaining why our client deserves the Rebate. Moreover, consistency is of particular importance when interpreting standard form contracts. Given its conclusions regarding paragraphs 20(1)(a) and (b), the Court did not address the applicability of paragraphs 20(1)(c) and 20(1)(d) of the ATIA. Is either party entitled to costs and, if so, of what nature and amount? Note: Documents for the Federal Court of Appeal will not be accepted for filing through the Federal Court's Electronic Filing System. 1 - Short Title 1.1 - PART 1 - Application and Interpretation 1.1 - Application 2 - Interpretation 6 - Computation, Extension and Abridgement of Time 9 to 11 - PART 2 - Administration of the Court 9 to 11 - Officers of the Court 13 - Court Seals 14 - Registry 19 - Fees 21 - Court Files 27 - Unclaimed Exhibits Legistics is a collection of terms commonly used in legislative decisions or legal documents. Cases in Brief. In dissent, Boivin J.A. Siobhan Monaghan, who is elevated to the Federal Court of Appeal effective August 4, 2021. CanLII's goal is to make Canadian law accessible for free on the Internet. Ms. O’Grady has no direct standing to bring this application. Air Transat also sought, under sections 18 and 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act, to have the Information Commissioner’s investigation report set aside. Defence Construction Canada v. Ucanu Manufacturing Corp., 2017, Paragraph 20(1)(a) – Third party information, trade secrets, Paragraph 20(1)(b) – Third party information, financial, commercial, scientific or technical information, Paragraph 20(1)(c) – Third party information, disclosure to result in material financial loss or gain, Paragraph 20(1)(d) – Third party information, disclosure to interfere with contractual or other negotiations of a third party, Section 32 – Notice of intention to investigate, Subsection 35(1) – Investigation in private, Section 37– Findings and recommendations of Information Commissioner, Should the Court grant Air Transat’s motion to strike certain paragraphs and certain exhibits in support of the respondent Information Commissioner’s. Considering the ATIA’s objective and the overall scheme, and giving effect to the Information Commissioner’s role and mandate confirmed by Parliament, the general principle that mandatory exemptions cannot be late-claimed is sound, though could admit exceptions in certain limited circumstances. The Federal Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed Apotex’s appeal. The Court described the four-part test for the applicability of paragraph 20(1)(b): (1) the information must be financial, commercial, scientific or technical in nature; (2) the information must be confidential; (3) the information must be supplied to a federal institution by a third party; and (4) the information must be treated consistently in a confidential manner by the third party (see Porter Airlines v. Canada (Attorney General), 2014 FC 392 (CanLII), at para 30, and Air Atonabee Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [1989] F.C.J. The two step control test, developed in Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Minister of National Defence), 2011 SCC 25, was applied to find that PSEPC did not have control over records related to a Correctional Service of Canada independent review panel. Canada (Federal) Legislation. Ucanu complained to the Information Commissioner, who found that the undisclosed records were properly exempt from disclosure. Ms. O’Grady’s situation is not representative of all persons whose information was used. She made a complaint to the Office of the Information Commissioner. A portfolio of ministries is not a “government institution” as it is defined under the ATIA. The evidence is clear that her records were not included in the Study. Provision of the Access to Information Act: Section 24. Paragraph 42(1)(c) – Information Commissioner may appear as a party with leave of the Court. In 2011, Statistics Canada and McGill entered into a Letter of Agreement to conduct a study that would assess infant mortality and newborn health by examining perinatal outcomes in Canada according to various risk factors. This case is a classic instance of an irresistible force meeting an immovable object. 2003 - 2021-10-21. Legistics is a collection of terms commonly used in legislative decisions or legal documents. 2006 - 2021-10-21 … There are also certain questions associated with the Information Commissioner’s test that require further study, full submissions and the benefit of Federal Court rulings. Whether read in isolation or within the context of the General Conditions, there was no explicit or implicit restriction to the type of disclosure agreed upon by the Offeror regarding its standing offer unit prices or rates. Rule 104 had to be adapted accordingly. The Court stated “[w]hen I consider that with the fact that TC only gave Air Transat a single opportunity of less than 60 days to present its case in a matter that went on for more than 10 years, I must conclude that TC breached its duty to act fairly regarding Air Transat’s right to be heard” (para. The Court accepted Air Transat’s assertion that the information in the report was never publicly disclosed and that it remained between the President and CEO and certain employees in the corporate quality assurance department. All Forms in Word Format ; Form 1 in HTML Format ; Form 1 in Word Format ; Form 23A (Combined 23A and 23B Dynamic PDF) Form 23A (PDF for print) Form 23B only (Dynamic PDF) Form 23B only (PDF for print) Did the Judge err in refusing to interfere with the Prothonotary’s order granting leave to the Commissioner to appear as a respondent to Apotex’s judicial review application? Citation: 2016 FC 1167. Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (PSEPC), as one government institution within a portfolio of related ministries, did not automatically have control over records assumed to exist within another department within the same portfolio. The Information Commissioner’s investigation took over 10 years. Found inside – Page 264In fact, during the final quarter of 2013 (the period selected for comparison on this issue) the Federal Court of Canada was around half as likely to quash a decision of a migration tribunal as Australia's federal courts.311 E. Marginal note: Navigation and shipping 22 (1) The Federal Court has concurrent original jurisdiction, between subject and subject as well as otherwise, in all cases in which a claim for relief is made or a remedy is sought under or by virtue of Canadian maritime law or any other law of Canada relating to any matter coming within the class of subject of navigation … SASKATOON, Saskatchewan, Oct. 30, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Cameco (TSX: CCO; NYSE: CCJ) received notice today that Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has sought leave from the Supreme Court of Canada (Supreme Court) to appeal the June 26, 2020 decision of the Federal Court of Appeal, which found in favour of Cameco in its dispute of … There was no basis upon which to interfere with existing cost awards to which Professor Yeager is subject as part of this litigation. Under this act, the Parole Board of Canada can order, refuse to order, and revoke a record suspension. The courts have indicated that it is necessary to avoid even the possibility or perception of bias. Views: 4238. Supreme Court of Canada. Professor Yeager submits that when the issue is a denial of records, the standard of review is correctness as established in Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Minister of National Defence), 2011 SCC 25 (“National Defence”). Therefore, the question becomes whether the documents the applicant adduced into evidence and other responsive documents that can be presumed to exist at CSC are under the control of PSEPC on the basis of the applicant’s “portfolio argument”. The Information Commissioner brought a motion seeking leave to be added as respondent to Apotex’s application for judicial review pursuant to paragraph 42(1)(c) of the ATIA. In a notice filed Friday with the Federal Court of Appeal, Fortin’s lawyers asked that his case be sent to a different Federal Court judge for a full hearing of his judicial review application. On September 1, 2007, subsection 4(2.1) of the ATIA came into force. While the issue of the adjournment was not challenged in the notice of appeal, it is part and parcel of the merits of the appeal and cannot be separated from it. SOR/98-106. Unit Condition: [unit_condition] The Supreme Court indirectly recognized in National Defence that assessing whether or not an institution controls a record under the ATIA is the sort of binary question that does not fit in well with conventional standard of review analysis; it treated the Federal Court as the initial forum for deciding the merits, whereas conventionally in a judicial review, the merits are decided by the administrative tribunal, while the Court merely assesses the legality of the tribunal’s decision. The Study’s objective is to analyze and determine trends regarding perinatal health for usage in the development of social and health policies. The matter was remitted back to PWGSC for redetermination in accordance with the Court’s reasons. First, the response by PSEPC did not purport to be a blanket, portfolio-wide denial; it was only a denial that there were relevant records within PSEPC. Found insideIn Don’t Mess It Up: How Founders and Their Successors Can Avoid the Clichés That Inhibit Growth, author and six-time second CEO Les Trachtman offers his expertise on the most effective ways to successfully hand off your company to a ... Albatal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Federal Court of Canada. What is the appropriate standard of review? Secondly, the Judge assumed that the previous decision made by DND was binding and correct. 10. The Federal Court observed correctly that the jurisprudential issue has never been settled by the Federal Court of Appeal. The second FCA decision (CMRRA-SODRAC Inc. v. Apple Canada Inc., 2020 FCA 101) also involved the application of the MAR in the context of an assessment of a tariff for sound recordings, but unlike the decision in ESA v SOCAN #2, the collective society was unsuccessful at first instance, and failed to certify … As such, the Court held that the Information Commissioner was entitled to submit affidavits to explain to the Court the steps that she took in her investigation and the causes of the delays in her investigation, even if the information in some paragraphs and some supporting exhibits were not shared during the investigation. Madam Justice Biringer replaces Madam Justice K.A. First, the ATIA itself does not distinguish between disclosure within government and disclosure to the public. She has not led the Court to any evidence which would show how this could be done. Janssen submitted that Takeda was not binding on the Federal Court or on the Minister because the Supreme Court’s decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov , 2019 SCC 65 (Vavilov) raised a new legal issue and represented a fundamental change … Finally, Air Transat filed a motion to strike certain paragraphs and exhibits in support of two affidavits of the respondent Information Commissioner. However, the concept of a ‘consistent use’ overcomes the obvious difficulties that will arise over time in deciding whether the use of the census information in this Study is permitted under the Privacy Act. He also accepted that evidence of heightened competition or increased competitive pressure is not sufficient to establish that the harm can reasonably be expected to occur. Antarctic Environmental Protection Act, S.C. 2003, c. 20. It referred to Air Transat’s claim that it only agreed to take part in the implementation of the safety management system with Transport Canada on condition that the confidentiality of the data and the report would be respected by Transport Canada. The linked data was then retained within Statistics Canada premises and, once again, could only be accessed by Statistics Canada employees or deemed employees. None of these provisions come into play on the facts of this case, either for Ms. O’Grady or for anyone whose records were actually used. The decision is available on the Federal Court Decisions website at O’Grady v. Canada (Attorney General), 2017 FC 167. That evidence might have shed light on why the exemption was being asserted late and why it should be allowed to be asserted late. The court also lacks the authority to consider the wisdom of government document retention policies. The study satisfies the Bernard test for ‘consistent use’. Where a question of mixed fact and law contains an extricable legal question, the standard of review will also be correctness. The Court did not comment on the other claims put forth by Air Transat given its conclusions regarding the issues addressed. UKJCPC. Second, the definition of “government institution” in section 3 of the ATIA is clear and explicit: it means any department or ministry of state of the Government of Canada, or any body or office listed in Schedule 1.