Date: 19990923
Docket: A-204-97
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THIS 23rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1999
CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROTHSTEIN
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NOËL J.A.
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SEXTON J.A.
| IN THE MATTER OF an application to review and set aside, pursuant to section 27 of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, as amended, the Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Dubé in respect of a decision of the Public Service Commission rendered October 6, 1995, pursuant to the Public Service Employment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-33. |
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
- and -
ALICE McAULIFFE
Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario
on Thursday, September 23, 1999)
The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
"Marshall Rothstein"
J.A.
Date: 19990923
Docket: A-204-97
CORAM: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
NOËL J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
| IN THE MATTER OF an application to review and set aside, pursuant to section 27 of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, as amended, the Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Dubé in respect of a decision of the Public Service Commission rendered October 6, 1995, pursuant to the Public Service Employment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-33. |
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
- and -
ALICE McAULIFFE
Respondent
HEARD at Ottawa, on Thursday, September 23, 1999
JUDGMENT delivered from the Bench on Thursday, September 23, 1999
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
Date: 19990923
Docket: A-204-97
CORAM: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
NOËL J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
| IN THE MATTER OF an application to review and set aside, pursuant to section 27 of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, as amended, the Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Dubé in respect of a decision of the Public Service Commission rendered October 6, 1995, pursuant to the Public Service Employment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-33. |
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
- and -
ALICE McAULIFFE
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario
on Thursday, September 23, 1999)
ROTHSTEIN J.A.
[1] Counsel for the appellant concedes that the Order of Dubé J. has been implemented and that the matter is moot. Nonetheless, he asks the Court to pronounce on certain issues. However, as the case is largely fact-specific, in our view it would serve no useful purpose for the Court to exercise its discretion to hear and decide the matter despite the fact that it is moot. The appeal will be dismissed on the grounds of mootness with costs to the respondent.
"Marshall Rothstein"
J.A.
"Marc Noël"
"J. Edgar Sexton"
Email this Content