Dockets: A-142-19
A-143-19
Citation: 2020 FCA 28
| CORAM:
|
PELLETIER J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
LASKIN J.A.
|
| BETWEEN:
|
| DEMOCRACY WATCH
|
| Appellant
|
| and
|
| ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
|
| Respondent
|
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 28, 2020.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 28, 2020.
| REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
|
PELLETIER J.A.
|
Dockets: A-142-19
A-143-19
Citation: 2020 FCA 28
| CORAM:
|
PELLETIER J.A.
GLEASON J.A.
LASKIN J.A.
|
| BETWEEN:
|
| DEMOCRACY WATCH
|
| Appellant
|
| and
|
| ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
|
| Respondent
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 28, 2020)
PELLETIER J.A.
[1]
Despite counsel’s best efforts, we are all of the view that this appeal should be dismissed.
[2]
At issue is a question of statutory interpretation, albeit implicit. The presumptive standard of review is reasonableness: Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 at para. 16.
[3]
The appellant has a view as to what the statute requires. The Governor in Council has another. Reasonableness contemplates precisely this possibility. We have not been persuaded that the Governor in Council’s view is unreasonable.
[4]
This is not to say that the Governor in Council’s view in this case will be reasonable in every case but it was reasonable in this case.
[5]
As for the argument that the Governor in Council was biased, the nature of the scheme makes such a situation inevitable: Ocean Port Hotel Ltd. v. British Columbia (General Manager, Liquor Control and Licensing Branch), 2001 SCC 52, [2001] 2 S.C.R. 781 at para. 22.
[6]
The appeal will be dismissed. The parties are given three days to make submissions on costs, failing which the Court will assess costs in its discretion.
“J.D. Denis Pelletier”
Email this Content