DOCSLIB.ORG

Applicant's Record Volume 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Applicant's Record Volume 1 Court File No.: A-218-14 FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: DR. GÁBOR LUKÁCS Applicant – and – CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION AGENCY Respondent (Application under section 28 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7) APPLICANT’S RECORD VOLUME 1 Dated: September 30, 2014 DR. GÁBOR LUKÁCS Halifax, NS [email protected] Applicant TO: CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION AGENCY 15 Eddy Street Gatineau, QC J8X 4B3 Odette Lalumière Tel: (819) 994 2226 Fax: (819) 953 9269 Solicitor for the Respondent, Canadian Transportation Agency TABLE OF CONTENTS OF VOLUME 1 1 Notice of Application 1 2 Affidavit of Dr. Gábor Lukács, affirmed on April 25, 2014 13 A Email of Dr. Lukács to the Agency, dated February 14, 2014 18 B Follow-up email of Dr. Lukács to the Agency, dated February 17, 2014 20 C Email of Ms. Odette Lalumiere, Senior Counsel of the Agency, to Dr. Lukács, dated February 17, 2014 22 D Follow-up email of Dr. Lukács to the Agency, dated February 21, 2014 24 E Email of Ms. Lalumiere to Dr. Lukács, dated February 24, 2014 27 F Email of Dr. Lukács to Ms. Lalumiere, dated February 24, 2014 30 G Email of Ms. Patrice Bellerose to Dr. Lukács, dated February 24, 2014 33 H Email of Dr. Lukács to Ms. Bellerose, dated February 24, 2014 37 I Email of Ms. Bellerose to Dr. Lukács, including attachment (“Redacted File”), dated March 19, 2014 41 J Letter of Dr. Lukács to the Agency, dated March 24, 2014 164 K Letter of Mr. Geoffrey C. Hare, Chair and Chief Executive Officer of the Agency, to Dr. Lukács, dated March 26, 2014 167 3 Transcript of cross-examination of Ms. Patrice Bellerose on her affidavit sworn on July 29, 2014 170 4 Memorandum of Fact and Law of the Applicant 198 PART I STATEMENT OF FACTS 198 A. Overview 198 B. Background: the Agency and the open court principle 199 C. The Agency’s practice with respect to viewing tribunal files 200 D. The Applicant’s request to view a tribunal file 201 PART II STATEMENT OF THE POINTS IN ISSUE 205 PART III STATEMENT OF SUBMISSIONS 206 A. Standard of review: correctness 207 B. Open court principle and s. 2(b) of the Charter 207 C. Tribunal files fall within the exclusions and/or the exceptions to the Privacy Act 214 D. Inapplicability of the Privacy Act: the Oakes test 217 E. Remedies 218 F. Costs 222 PART IV ORDER SOUGHT 223 PART V LIST OF AUTHORITIES 225 APPENDIX “A” – STATUTES AND REGULATIONS 230 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 231 — sections 1 and 2 231 — subsection 24(1) 233 Canada Transportation Act, S.C. 1996, c. 10, sections 1-41 235 — section 7 239 — sections 17 and 19 242 Canadian Transportation Agency Rules (Dispute Proceedings and Certain Rules Applicable to All Proceedings), S.O.R./2014-104 247 — subsection 7(2) 248 — subsection 18(1) 249 — section 19 250 — subsection 31(2) 251 — Schedule 5 254 — Schedule 6 255 Canadian Transportation Agency General Rules, S.O.R./2005-35 256 — subsection 23(1) 257 — subsection 23(6) 259 — section 40 262 Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7 263 — section 18 264 — section 18.1 265 — section 28 267 — paragraph 28(1)(k) 268 — subsection 28(2) 269 Federal Courts Rules, S.O.R./98-106 270 — Rule 81(1) 271 Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21 272 — paragraphs 8(2)(a) and 8(2)(b) 273 — subparagraph 8(2)(m)(i) (English) 274 — subparagraph 8(2)(m)(i) (French) 275 — subsection 69(2) 277 1 Court File No.: FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: DR. GÁBOR LUKÁCS Applicant – and – CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION AGENCY Respondent NOTICE OF APPLICATION TO THE RESPONDENT: A PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED by the Applicant. The relief claimed by the Applicant appears on the following page. THIS APPLICATION will be heard by the Court at a time and place to be fixed by the Judicial Administrator. Unless the Court orders otherwise, the place of hearing will be as requested by the Applicant. The Applicant requests that this application be heard at the Federal Court of Appeal in Halifax, Nova Scotia. IF YOU WISH TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION, to receive notice of any step in the application or to be served with any documents in the application, you or a solicitor acting for you must prepare a notice of appearance in Form 305 prescribed by the Federal Courts Rules and serve it on the Applicant’s solicitor, or where the applicant is self-represented, on the Applicant, WITHIN 10 DAYS after being served with this notice of application. Copies of the Federal Courts Rules, information concerning the local offices of the Court and other necessary information may be obtained on request to the Administrator of this Court at Ottawa (telephone 613-992-4238) or at any local office. - 2 - 2 IF YOU FAIL TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. Date: April 22, 2014 Issued by: Address of local office: Federal Court of Appeal 1801 Hollis Street Halifax, Nova Scotia TO: CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION AGENCY 15 Eddy Street Gatineau, Quebec J8X 4B3 Ms. Cathy Murphy, Secretary Tel: 819-997-0099 Fax: 819-953-5253 - 3 - 3 APPLICATION This is an application for judicial review in respect of: (a) the practices of the Canadian Transportation Agency (“Agency”) related to the rights of the public, pursuant to the open-court principle, to view information provided in the course of adjudicative proceedings; and (b) the refusal of the Agency to allow the Applicant to view unredacted doc- uments in File No. M4120-3/13-05726 of the Agency, even though no confidentiality order has been sought or made in that file. The Applicant makes application for: 1. a declaration that adjudicative proceedings before the Canadian Trans- portation Agency are subject to the constitutionally protected open-court principle; 2. a declaration that all information, including but not limited to documents and submissions, provided to the Canadian Transportation Agency in the course of adjudicative proceedings are part of the public record in their entirety, unless confidentiality was sought and granted in accordance with the Agency’s General Rules; 3. a declaration that members of the public are entitled to view all informa- tion, including but not limited to documents and submissions, provided to the Canadian Transportation Agency in the course of adjudicative pro- ceedings, unless confidentiality was sought and granted in accordance with the Agency’s General Rules; 4. a declaration that information provided to the Canadian Transportation Agency in the course of adjudicative proceedings fall within the excep- tions of subsections 69(2) and/or 8(2)(a) and/or 8(2)(b) and/or 8(2)(m) of the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21; - 4 - 4 5. in the alternative, a declaration that provisions of the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21 are inapplicable with respect to information, including but not limited to documents and submissions, provided to the Canadian Transportation Agency in the course of adjudicative proceedings to the extent that these provisions limit the rights of the public to view such in- formation pursuant to subsection 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; 6. a declaration that the power to determine questions related to confiden- tiality of information provided in the course of adjudicative proceedings before the Canadian Transportation Agency is reserved to Members of the Agency, and cannot be delegated to Agency Staff; 7. an order of a mandamus, directing the Canadian Transportation Agency to provide the Applicant with unredacted copies of the documents in File No. M4120-3/13-05726, or otherwise allow the Applicant and/or others on his behalf to view unredacted copies of these documents; 8. costs and/or reasonable out-of-pocket expenses of this application; 9. such further and other relief or directions as the Applicant may request and this Honourable Court deems just. The grounds for the application are as follows: 1. The Canadian Transportation Agency (“Agency”), established by the Canada Transportation Act, S.C. 1996, c. 10 (“CTA”), has a broad man- date in respect of all transportation matters under the legislative author- ity of Parliament. The Agency performs two key functions: (a) as a quasi-judicial tribunal, the Agency resolves commercial and consumer transportation-related disputes; and (b) as an economic regulator, the Agency makes determinations and issues licenses and permits to carriers which function within the ambit of Parliament’s authority. - 5 - 5 2. The present application challenges the failure of the Agency to comply, in practice, with the open-court principle and/or its own General Rules and/or Privacy Statement with respect to the open-court principle in the context of the right of the public to view information, including but not limited to documents and submissions, provided to the Agency in the course of adjudicative proceedings. A. The Agency’s General Rules 3. The Canadian Transportation Agency General Rules, S.O.R./2005-35, contain detailed provisions implementing the open-court principle, and provide for procedures for claiming confidentiality: 23. (1) The Agency shall place on its public record any document filed with it in respect of any proceeding unless the person filing the document makes a claim for its confi- dentiality in accordance with this section. 23. (5) A person making a claim for confidentiality shall indicate (a) the reasons for the claim, including, if any specific direct harm is asserted, the nature and extent of the harm that would likely result to the person mak- ing the claim for confidentiality if the document were disclosed; and (b) whether the person objects to having a version of the document from which the confidential informa- tion has been removed placed on the public record and, if so, shall state the reasons for objecting.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CANADIAN MILITARY LAW SENTENCING UNDER the NATIONAL DEFENCE ACT." PERSPECTIVES and MUSINGS of a FORMER SOLDIER Colonel (Ret.) Me Michel W
    39 1 CANADIAN MILITARY LAW SENTENCING UNDER THE NATIONAL DEFENCE ACT." PERSPECTIVES AND MUSINGS OF A FORMER SOLDIER Colonel (Ret.) Me Michel W. Drapeau' Ottawa The Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms recognizes the existence of the militaryjustice system and its own tribunals operating in parallel to the Canadian criminal law system. Yet, there continues to be an absolutepaucity of any reference works on military law and members of the Canadian military bar are seldom heard or read. This article aims atfilling the void, at least in part. In writing this article, the author, who servedfor 34 years in general staff and command positions in the Canadian Forces, had two general purposes in mind: a) to present the general reader with a general overview ofthe history, customs, organization, and structure ofthe military personnel system, and b) to provide a reference work presenting a detailed view ofthe Code ofMilitary Discipline, both in its contents and its workings. Finally, in light ofthe extensive changes in 1999 to the National Defence Act and the accompanying regulations, the author concludes by reviewing the nature and impact of each of the punishments that may be imposed by a military tribunal or the Court Martial Appeal Court ofCanada to those who are subject to the Code ofService Discipline. La Charte canadienne des droits et libertés reconnaît la eo-existence d'un système de justice militaire avec ses propres tribunaux en parallèle avec le droit pénal canadien. Cependant, même si de nombreux livres ont décrit et interprété l'histoire militaire canadienne, il existe présentement aucun ouvrage sur le droit militaire et les praticiens de ce droit se font que très rarement entendre.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    ERGA OMNES OR INTER PARTES ? THE LEGAL EFFECTS OF FEDERAL COURTS’ CONSTITUTIONAL JUDGMENTS Han-Ru Zhou* Does a Federal Court constitutional judgment apply only to parties to a case or can it extend beyond those parties? In other words, beyond the purview of the principles of stare decisis and res judicata, are the effects of the Federal Courts’ constitutional rulings inter partes or erga omnes? The answer to this question will shape the conduct of public authorities and private actors, the deference accorded by other Canadian courts to the Federal Courts’ constitutional jurisprudence, and, ultimately, institutional respect in the community. Little guidance can be found in the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982, the provisions of which are compatible with both inter partes and erga omnes views. With regard to provincial statutory courts, it has been held that their rulings produce inter partes effects only, as they have no inherent jurisdiction, a characteristic of superior courts. However, the resort to the notion of inherent jurisdiction fails to resolve the matter vis-à- vis the Federal Courts whose judgments are not subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of provincial superior courts. The clearest answer is offered by judicial practice and attitudes over the years, to the extent that Canadian judges have generally assumed the constitutional holdings of the Federal Courts to be erga omnes. However, as with any rule, a fortiori a judge-made law, the power to render erga omnes judgments can evolve as a reflection of the relevant changing realities in modern society. In this regard, normative considerations of the Federal Courts’ expertise and efficiency of the dispute resolution process do not clearly favour one view over the other.
    [Show full text]
  • IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER Third Series/Troisi`Eme S´Erie Recueil De Jurisprudence En Droit De L’Immigration
    IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER Third Series/Troisi`eme s´erie Recueil de jurisprudence en droit de l’immigration VOLUME 95 (Cited 95 Imm. L.R. (3d)) EDITORS-IN-CHIEF/REDACTEURS´ EN CHEF Cecil L. Rotenberg, Q.C. Mario D. Bellissimo, LL.B. Barrister & Solicitor Ormston, Bellissimo, Rotenberg Don Mills, Ontario Toronto, Ontario Certified Specialist Certified Specialist ASSOCIATE EDITOR/REDACTEUR´ ADJOINT Randolph Hahn, D.PHIL.(OXON), LL.B. Guberman, Garson Toronto, Ontario Certified Specialist CARSWELL EDITORIAL STAFF/REDACTION´ DE CARSWELL Jeffrey D. Mitchell, B.A., M.A. Director, Information Management and Manufacturing Directeur, service d’´edition et de production Graham B. Peddie, LL.B. Product Development Manager Sharon Yale, LL.B., M.A. Julia Fischer, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Supervisor, Legal Writing Acting Supervisor, Legal Writing Peter Bondy, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Heather Stone, B.A., LL.B. Lead Legal Writer Lead Legal Writer Rachel Bernstein, B.A.(HON.), J.D. Peggy Gibbons, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Molly Grindley, B.SC. (HON.), LL.B., Stephanie Hanna, B.A., M.A., LL.B. LL.M. Senior Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Mark Koskie, B.A.(HON.), M.A., LL.B. Martin-Fran¸cois Parent, LL.B., Legal Writer LL.M., DEA (PARIS II) Bilingual Legal Writer Nicole Ross, B.A., LL.B. Amanda Stewart, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Erin McIntosh, B.A.(HON.) Content Editor IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER, a national series of topical law reports, Recueil de jurisprudence en droit de l’immigration, une s´erie nationale de is published twelve times per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapport Annuel 2005-2006 Notre Mission
    NOTRE APPUI, VOTRE RAYONNEMENT . RAPPORT ANNUEL 2005-2006 NOTRE MISSION PROMOUVOIR LA PROTECTION DU PUBLIC, PAR DES ACTIVITÉS D’INFORMATION ET DE SENSIBILISATION ET PAR UNE PARTICIPATION ACTIVE À L’ADMINISTRATION DE LA JUSTICE. IMPORTATION D’UNE VIEILLE TRADITION... L’histoire veut que l’expression « bâtonnier » provienne d’une coutume à l’effet que l’avocat considéré comme le plus digne par ses confrères porte le bâton au cours des cérémonies. Inspiré par cette histoire, le bâtonnier David R. Collier a décidé de l’importer et de remettre à son successeur le bâton ci-contre, espérant ainsi créer une nouvelle tradition au Barreau de Montréal. Le bâtonnier remercie monsieur Luc Paquette, antiquaire, pour son aide précieuse dans la conception et confection du bâton. TABLE DES MATIÈRES LE CONSEIL 4 Infractions 19 Les membres du Conseil 4 Journée du Barreau 19 Le rapport du bâtonnier 5 Liaison avec la Commission des relations du travail 20 Les réunions du Conseil du Barreau de Montréal 8 Liaison avec la Cour canadienne de l’impôt 20 Les réunions du Conseil général du Barreau du Québec 8 Liaison avec la Cour d’appel 21 Les subventions octroyées par le Conseil 8 Liaison avec la Cour d’appel fédérale et la Cour fédérale 22 Les résolutions adoptées par le Conseil 9 Liaison avec la Cour du Québec, chambre civile 23 Liaison avec la Cour du Québec, chambre de la jeunesse 24 L’ADMINISTRATION 10 Liaison avec la Cour municipale de Montréal 25 Le rapport de la directrice générale 10 Liaison avec la Cour supérieure, chambre commerciale 26 Les ressources
    [Show full text]
  • Current Methodologies for Identifying Labour Shortage1
    Volume 11, Issue 5 May 2015 “Qui bene interrogat bene docet” “He who questions well teaches well” Editors-in-chief: Cecil L. Rotenberg Q.C. and Mario D. Bellissimo LL.B., C.S. Current Methodologies INSIDE for Identifying Labour Focus—Defining Labour Market Shortage1 Shortages Cobus Kriek Current Methodologies for Identifying Labour • 22 April 2015 Shortage . 1 — Cobus Kriek 1. Background • Quick Bites ....................... 5 Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulation 203(3) stipu- lates that officers must assess 7 factors when a Labour Market Citizenship Changes: In Force or Yet to Come? ..5 Impact Assessment (LMIA) decision is rendered. Regulation — Joanna Carton Mennie, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B. 203(3)(c) specifically requires that an officer determine “whether Section 34(1)(f) of the IRPA — Membership the employment of the foreign national is likely to fill a labour Does Not Require Complicity ............6 shortage”. — Erin Christine Roth, B.A. (Hons.), J.D. My concern, in particular, is that the Federal government does not have a single national definition of ‘labour market shortage’ • Case Tracker: Cases You Should Know! . 7 but it: — Mario D. Bellissimo, LL.B., C.S. a. defined Occupation Lists (or list of Occupations-in- Demand) for decades for the Federal Skilled Worker Class; and b. have been refusing and approving thousands of Labour Market Opinion (LMO) and LMIA requests without defining the concept. Specifically, since 2002, Service Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) have not had a single 1 This is part 1 of a 2-part paper. Part 2 will appear in the June 2015 edition of ImmQuest.
    [Show full text]
  • IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER Third Series/Troisi`Eme S´Erie Recueil De Jurisprudence En Droit De L’Immigration VOLUME 96 (Cited 96 Imm
    IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER Third Series/Troisi`eme s´erie Recueil de jurisprudence en droit de l’immigration VOLUME 96 (Cited 96 Imm. L.R. (3d)) EDITORS-IN-CHIEF/REDACTEURS´ EN CHEF Cecil L. Rotenberg, Q.C. Mario D. Bellissimo, LL.B. Barrister & Solicitor Ormston, Bellissimo, Rotenberg Don Mills, Ontario Toronto, Ontario Certified Specialist Certified Specialist ASSOCIATE EDITOR/REDACTEUR´ ADJOINT Randolph Hahn, D.PHIL.(OXON), LL.B. Guberman, Garson Toronto, Ontario Certified Specialist CARSWELL EDITORIAL STAFF/REDACTION´ DE CARSWELL Jeffrey D. Mitchell, B.A., M.A. Director, Information Management and Manufacturing Directeur, service d’´edition et de production Graham B. Peddie, LL.B. Product Development Manager Sharon Yale, LL.B., M.A. Julia Fischer, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Supervisor, Legal Writing Acting Supervisor, Legal Writing Peter Bondy, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Heather Stone, B.A., LL.B. Lead Legal Writer Lead Legal Writer Rachel Bernstein, B.A.(HON.), J.D. Peggy Gibbons, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Stephanie Hanna, B.A., M.A., LL.B. Mark Koskie, B.A.(HON.), M.A., LL.B. Senior Legal Writer Legal Writer Nicole Ross, B.A., LL.B. Amanda Stewart, B.A.(HON.), LL.B. Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Martin-Fran¸cois Parent, LL.B., LL.M., DEA (PARIS II) Bilingual Legal Writer Erin McIntosh, B.A.(HON.) Content Editor IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER, a national series of topical law reports, Recueil de jurisprudence en droit de l’immigration, une s´erie nationale de is published twelve times per year. Subscription rate $361 per bound volume recueils de jurisprudence sp´ecialis´ee, est publi´e 12 fois par anne´e.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Representation of the People and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
    Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in Canada Federal Representation of the People and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador By: Christopher Dunn March 2003 The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily refl ect those of the Royal Commission on Renewing and Strengthening Our Place in Canada. Federal Representation of the People and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Acknowledgements The author gratefully acknowledges the insightful comments on this paper made by Douglas Brown, Frank O’Brien, and the two anonymous reviewers. Any errors of fact or interpretation are, of course, the responsibility of the author. Federal Representation of the People and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Federal Representation of the People and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................39 Concepts of Representation...........................................................................................41 Territorialism and Representation Theory..............................................................41 Political Representation.............................................................................................42 Representative Bureaucracy .....................................................................................42 Reconciliation .............................................................................................................43
    [Show full text]
  • Does Judicial Courage Exist, and If So, Is It Necessary in a Democracy?
    Western Journal of Legal Studies Volume 8 | Issue 2 Article 6 July 2018 Does Judicial Courage Exist, and if so, is it Necessary in a Democracy? 2018 CanLIIDocs 73 The onourH able Luc Martineau Federal Court of Canada, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/uwojls Part of the Courts Commons, Judges Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, and the Legal Profession Commons Recommended Citation The onourH able Luc Martineau , "Does Judicial Courage Exist, and if so, is it Necessary in a Democracy?", (2018) 8:2 online: UWO J Leg Stud 6 <https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/uwojls/vol8/iss2/6>. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western Journal of Legal Studies by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Does Judicial Courage Exist, and if so, is it Necessary in a Democracy? Abstract Jurists are trained to value the rule of law and judges are expected to uphold same whatever the circumstances. Separation of powers controls interactions of the legislative, executive and judicial branches, creating potential for friction where the legality or legitimacy of state action is at stake. The er al test of judicial independence comes in situations of crisis. Judges are not professional philosophers or politicians. Still, on a day to day basis, judges are called upon to make tough decisions that have dire consequences on a human level, which undoubtedly engages a judge’s conscience. Changing values shape the face of justice; and with the rise of populism, the role of the judiciary in a democracy has become a major topic of discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Courts Seminar / Colloque Des Cours
    Federal Courts Seminar / Colloque des Cours fédérales Oct 27 - Oct 28, 2011 Ottawa (Fairmont Chateau Laurier - Ottawa Convention Centre) List of All Participants and Faculty (Total 136) 1. Mr. Kevin Aalto, Prothonotary 15. L'honorable Pierre Blais, Juge en chef Federal Court Federal Court of Appeal 2. Ms. Roza Aronovitch, Prothonotary 16. L'honorable Edmond P. Blanchard, Juge en Federal Court chef Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada 3. Ms. Vanessa Arviset Brisset Bishop 17. Judge Danny J. Boggs United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth 4. Madame Julie S. Aubry Circuit Ministère de la Justice 18. Mr. Philippe Boisvert 5. Mr. Simon Barker Federal Court of Appeal AB Oland & Company 19. L'honorable juge Richard Boivin 6. Ms. Ashley Barnes Federal Court Federal Court 20. Ms. Chantelle Bowers 7. Mr. Andrew Baumberg Federal Court of Appeal Federal Court 21. Mr. Thomas Brady 8. Ms. Suzelle Bazinet Heenan BlaikieCour municipale de Thetford Federal Court of Appeal Mines 9. Ms. Susan Beaubien 22. Ms. Murielle Brazeau Macera & Jarzyna Federal Court 10. L'honorable juge Michel Beaudry 23. Commissioner William Brooks Federal Court Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs 11. L'honorable juge Marie‐Josée Bédard Federal Court 24. Mr. Daniel Brunet Office of the Information Commissioner 12. Ms. Judith Bellis Justice Canada 25. Madame Laurence Brunet‐Baldwin Federal Court of Appeal 13. The Honourable Justice Ronald L. Berger Court of Appeal of Alberta 26. Ms. Giovanna Calamo Federal Court 14. Mr. Andrew Bernstein Torys 27. The Honourable Justice Douglas R. Campbell Federal Court 28. Mr. David Colford Brisset Bishop 45.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Advocacy and Administrative Justice
    14TH ANNUAL NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT LAW CONFERENCE: The Evolution of Advocacy and Administrative Justice November 29-30, 2013 // Westin Hotel, Ottawa, ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2013 08:00 | 08:45 REGISTRATION 08:45 | 09:00 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS Lorna Pawluk, Chair, CBA National Administrative Law Section Delayne Sartison, Q.C., Chair, CBA National Labour & Employment Law Section 09:00 | 10:30 PLENARY SESSION: The Year in Review in Administrative Law and Labour & Employment Law Introduction: Delayne Sartison, Q.C., Chair, CBA National Labour & Employment Law Section Speakers: David Phillip Jones, Q.C., de Villars Jones (Edmonton) Stephen Moreau, Cavalluzzo Shilton McIntyre & Cornish (Toronto) 10:30 | 10:45 REFRESHMENT BREAK 10:45 | 12:15 CONCURRENT SESSIONS SESSION I: Administrative Law: Tribunal Independence Moderator: Geoffrey Plant, Q.C., Heenan Blaikie (Vancouver) Speakers: Rowland Harrison, Q.C., University of Alberta Faculty of Law (Edmonton) Ron Ellis, Q.C., Osgoode Hall Law School, York University (Toronto) The Honourable Konrad von Finckenstein, Q.C., Arbitrator (Toronto) SESSION II: Labour & Employment Law: Interest Arbitration – Evolution and Role in Collective Bargaining Moderator: Brian Keller, Arbitrator (Ottawa) Speakers: Bernard Philion, Philion Leblanc Beaudry avocats s.a. (Montréal) Brian O’Byrne, Fasken Martineau (Toronto) Raymond F. Larkin, Q.C., Pink Larkin (Halifax) Ron Leblanc, GRI Labour Relations Management Inc. (Ottawa) 12:15 | 14:00 LUNCH & FIRESIDE CHAT with Justice Louis LeBel Introduction:
    [Show full text]
  • Date: 20090626 Docket
    Date: 20090626 Docket: IMM-4884-08 Citation: 2009 FC 673 Ottawa, Ontario, June 26, 2009 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore BETWEEN: DAVID YOUNG SOP JUNUSMIN ANGELICA SARI DEWI PRETTY LADY YOUNG JUNUSMIN Applicants and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT I. INTRODUCTION [1] An uncontradicted narrative in evidence is the primary source of understanding the human condition in the context of any judicial analysis. The recognition and acknowledgement of the details of an individual or individuals’ background, especially in an immigration or refugee case, are essential. The circumstances, situations and events within a narrative must not be overlooked, otherwise, a travesty to justice could be the consequence. For jurisprudence to be valid, the narrative must be the prime source from which legal analysis begins and ends, or else, it is a theoretical, Page: 2 abstract exercise divorced from reality. Each individual before the law must be acknowledged for his or her narrative, otherwise, the very integrity of a legal system is in jeopardy. [2] In this vein, it is necessary to demonstrate a grasp of the country conditions to ensure that the setting is acknowledged; without a setting, a narrative cannot be understood in context. [3] In the present case, neither the narrative nor the country conditions were adequately, albeit briefly, demonstrated for an understanding of the Applicants’ situation. [4] Moreover, according to the uncontradicted narrative, the Applicants had to pay bribes in order not to be persecuted. If that is not persecution, what is? Despite money being paid, incidents arose demonstrating that no matter how much money was paid, these payments did not guarantee the Applicants’ safety.
    [Show full text]
  • IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER Fourth Series/Quatri`Eme S´Erie Recueil De Jurisprudence En Droit De L’Immigration VOLUME 8 (Cited 8 Imm
    IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER Fourth Series/Quatri`eme s´erie Recueil de jurisprudence en droit de l’immigration VOLUME 8 (Cited 8 Imm. L.R. (4th)) EDITORS-IN-CHIEF/REDACTEURS´ EN CHEF Cecil L. Rotenberg, Q.C. Mario D. Bellissimo, LL.B. Barrister & Solicitor Ormston, Bellissimo, Rotenberg Don Mills, Ontario Toronto, Ontario Certified Specialist Certified Specialist ASSOCIATE EDITOR/REDACTEUR´ ADJOINT Randolph Hahn, D.PHIL.(OXON), LL.B. Guberman, Garson Toronto, Ontario Certified Specialist CARSWELL EDITORIAL STAFF/REDACTION´ DE CARSWELL Cheryl L. McPherson, B.A.(HONS.) Director, Primary Content Operations Directrice des activit´es li´ees au contenu principal Graham B. Peddie, LL.B. Product Development Manager Sharon Yale, LL.B., M.A. Jennifer Weinberger, B.A.(HONS.), Supervisor, Legal Writing J.D. Supervisor, Legal Writing Peter Bondy, B.A.(HONS.), LL.B. Heather Stone, B.A., LL.B. Lead Legal Writer Lead Legal Writer Rachel Bernstein, B.A.(HONS.), J.D. Peggy Gibbons, B.A.(HONS.), LL.B. Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Jim Fitch, B.A., LL.B. Stephanie Hanna, B.A., M.A., LL.B. Senior Legal Writer Senior Legal Writer Mark Koskie, B.A.(HONS.), M.A., LL.B. Nicole Ross, B.A., LL.B. Legal Writer Legal Writer Amanda Stewart, B.A.(HONS.), LL.B. Martin-Fran¸cois Parent, LL.B., Senior Legal Writer LL.M., DEA (PARIS II) Bilingual Legal Writer Erin McIntosh, B.A.(HONS.) Content Editor IMMIGRATION LAW REPORTER, a national series of topical law reports, Recueil de jurisprudence en droit de l’immigration, une s´erie nationale de is published twelve times per year.
    [Show full text]