110
Date: 20121030
Docket: A-453-11
Citation: 2012
FCA 270
CORAM: NADON J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
TRUDEL J.A.
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
and
RAYMOND
ROBITAILLE
Respondent
Heard at Ottawa,
Ontario, on October 30, 2012.
Judgment
delivered from the bench at Ottawa, Ontario,
on October 30, 2012.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
NADON J.A.
Date: 20121030
Docket: A-453-11
Citation: 2012 FCA 270
CORAM: NADON
J.A.
GAUTHIER
J.A.
TRUDEL
J.A.
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
CANADA
Appellant
and
RAYMOND ROBITAILLE
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the
bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2012)
NADON J.A.
[1]
In
a decision dated May 27, 2010, citation 2010 PSLRB 70, adjudicator Michele
Pineau of the Public Service Labour Relations Board of Canada (the adjudicator)
allowed four grievances filed by the respondent against his employer, the
Department of Transport (the employer).
[2]
Paragraphs 349–55
of the adjudicator’s decision list the remedies that she deemed necessary to
compensate the respondent for the unjustified disciplinary action taken against
him by his employer. Among other remedies, the adjudicator ordered the
following at paragraph 352:
With respect to the grievor’s
career, I order the deputy head, at its expense, to have a human resources
expert conduct a financial assessment of the grievor’s loss of career
advancement opportunities since September 6, 2005, and to reimburse the grievor
for any loss of pay and benefits, including pension benefits, which resulted
from that loss of advancement.
[3]
The
appellant filed an application for judicial review with the Federal Court
raising several issues, including the remedy described at paragraph 352 of
the adjudicator’s decision. According to the appellant, the adjudicator erred
in ordering the employer to calculate, at its expense, the financial losses
incurred by the respondent as a result of his loss of career advancement
opportunities.
[4]
Justice Pinard
of the Federal Court, in a decision dated October 27, 2011, citation 2011
FC 1218, allowed in part the application for judicial review, but rejected the
appellant’s argument relating to the remedy ordered by the adjudicator at
paragraph 352 of her decision.
[5]
Before
this Court, the appellant is challenging Pinard J.’s finding that the
adjudicator had the authority to order the deputy head (Department of
Transport) to conduct, at the department’s expense, a financial assessment of
the respondent’s loss of career advancement opportunities. According to the
appellant, because the onus was on the respondent to demonstrate the loss he
had incurred, it was not open to the adjudicator to issue the order she did,
and the judge thus erred in law in refusing to intervene.
[6]
During
the appeal hearing, counsel for the appellant, in response to our questions,
informed us that the parties had reached a settlement with respect to the
respondent’s financial compensation for his loss of career advancement
opportunities, adding that it would not be paid until the conclusion of this litigation.
The appellant has asked that we decide the issue raised by the appeal even
though it has become moot.
[7]
We
do not consider it appropriate in the circumstances of this case to decide the
issue raised by the appeal, particularly in light of the fact that the
respondent is not before this Court.
[8]
For
these reasons, the appeal will be dismissed.
“M.
Nadon”
Certified
true translation
Erich
Klein
FEDERAL COURT OF
APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-453-11
STYLE OF CAUSE: A.G.C.
v. RAYMOND ROBITAILLE
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: October 30, 2012
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT BY: NADON, GAUTHIER, TRUDEL JJ.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE
BENCH BY: NADON J.A.
APPEARANCES:
|
Adrian Bieniasiewicz
|
FOR
THE APPELLANT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
|
Myles J. Kirvan
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
Email this Content