Docket: A-221-14
Citation: 2014 FCA 261
|
CORAM:
|
NOËL C.J.
GAUTHIER J.A.
BOIVIN J.A.
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
RON TRIMBLE, JEFF SMITH AND ROBERT CLARKE
|
|
Applicants
|
|
and
|
|
ALBERT BENOIT
|
|
Respondent
|
Heard at Montréal, Quebec, on November 6, 2014.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November
6, 2014.
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
|
GAUTHIER
J.A.
|
Docket: A-221-14
Citation:
2014 FCA 261
|
CORAM:
|
NOËL C.J.
GAUTHIER J.A.
BOIVIN J.A.
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
|
RON TRIMBLE, JEFF SMITH AND ROBERT CLARKE
|
|
|
Applicants
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
ALBERT BENOIT
|
|
|
Respondent
|
|
|
|
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 6, 2014).
GAUTHIER J.A.
[1]
We have not been persuaded that the decision of
the Public Service Labour Relations Board (the Board) concluding that the
complaint of unfair labour practice (Sections 185 and 187 of the Public
Service Labour Relations Act, S.C. 2003 c. 22, s 2 ) was unreasonable.
[2]
In particular, the applicants have not
established that the Board made an error of law in i) considering evidence
presented by both sides in respect of events that occurred after the date of
filing of the complaint or ii) in applying s 187 (duty of fair representation)
to internal union affairs . First, it is unnecessary to decide whether it was
appropriate in this particular case for the Board to hear and decide on the
basis of events that took place after the complaint. This evidence simply
confirmed the conclusion the Board had reached at paragraph 44 of its decision (reported
as 2014 PSLRB 46) which is based solely on the events described in the
complaint.
[3]
Second, the Board expressly held that this case
could not be characterized as one involving internal union matters. This
finding was open to it considering the Board’s factual finding of bad faith and
that the complainant reasonably had no expectation of assistance from the
bargaining agent (paragraph 52 of the decision).
[4]
Further, we cannot agree that the Board acted ultra petita in issuing the order it did
(remedies). The remedy originally sought was not available as it exceeded the
Board’s jurisdiction (i.e. removal). As a result, the Board granted a remedy that was as
responsive as possible to the remedy sought without exceeding its jurisdiction.
[5]
Finally, considering the purpose of the
publication ordered, the period of publication has not been shown to be
unreasonable.
[6]
The application for judicial review will be
dismissed.
“Johanne Gauthier”
FEDERAL
COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES
OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
|
DOCKET:
|
A-221-14
|
|
STYLE OF CAUSE:
|
RON TRIMBLE,
JEFF SMITH AND ROBERT CLARKE v. ALBERT BENOIT
|
|
PLACE OF
HEARING:
|
Montréal, Quebec
|
|
DATE OF
HEARING:
|
November 6, 2014
|
|
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
|
NOËL C.J.
GAUTHIER J.A.
BOIVIN J.A.
|
|
DELIVERED
FROM THE BENCH BY:
|
GAUTHIER
J.A.
|
APPEARANCES:
|
Arianne Bouchard
|
For The
Applicants
RON TRIMBLE, JEFF SMITH AND ROBERT CLARKE
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Confédération des
syndicats nationaux
Montréal, Quebec
|
For The
Applicants
RON TRIMBLE, JEFF SMITH AND ROBERT CLARKE
|
Email this Content