Gko Engineering A Partnership v. The Queen, 2001 FCA 73

Date: 20010319

Docket: A-384-00

Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 73

PRESENT:      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROTHSTEIN

BETWEEN:

                                            GKO ENGINEERING - A PARTNERSHIP

                                                                                                                                                         Applicant

                                                                              AND

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                          ORDER rendered at Ottawa, Ontario, on Monday, March 19, 2001

REASONS FOR ORDER BY:                                                                                       ROTHSTEIN J.A.

Date: 20010319

Docket: A-384-00

Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 73

PRESENT:      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROTHSTEIN

BETWEEN:

                                            GKO ENGINEERING - A PARTNERSHIP

                                                                                                                                                         Applicant

                                                                              AND

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

ROTHSTEIN J.A.

[1]                 This is a motion by the applicant, GKO Engineering, to strike certain paragraphs from the respondent's record that deal with issues not raised by the applicant in its notice of application for judicial review or in its application record. The applicant says that to raise such issues, the respondent should have filed her own application for judicial review which she has not done.

[2]                 What is at issue on a judicial review is the judgment of the lower Court or tribunal under review, not the reasons for judgment. An applicant for judicial review seeks to have the matter remitted for redetermination leading to a different disposition by the lower Court or tribunal.   

[3]                 A respondent is normally satisfied with the disposition by the lower Court or tribunal. Accordingly, the respondent has no reason to seek judicial review of that judgment. However, the respondent may not agree with all the reasons of the lower Court or tribunal. Unless the respondent seeks a different disposition, however, the respondent has no basis to bring its own judicial review application. Where it does not seek to have the matter remitted for a different disposition, the appropriate procedure is for the respondent to raise, in its record on the applicant's judicial review, those arguments it seeks to make in respect of those portions of the reasons with which it disagrees.

[4]                 This is not a case in which the issues did not arise or in which arguments were not made in the lower Court or tribunal, in which case it might well be inappropriate for a party to raise new arguments on judicial review in this Court.

[5]                 I would dismiss the applicant's motion with costs.

                                                                                                                                      "Marshall Rothstein"                    

                                                                                                                                                                  J.A.