Casciato v. Centennial College of Arts and Technology, 2006 FCA 332

Date: 20061018

Docket: A-54-06

Citation: 2006 FCA 332

CORAM:       LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

                        NOËL J.A.                

                        EVANS J.A.

BETWEEN:

PALMA CASCIATO

Appellant

and

THE CENTENNIAL COLLEGE OF ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY

Respondent

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on October 10, 2006.

Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 18, 2006.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                                                   LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:                                                                                                      NOËL J.A.

                                                                                                                                       EVANS J.A.

Date: 20061018

Docket: A-54-06

Citation: 2006 FCA 332

CORAM:       LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

                        NOËL J.A.                

                        EVANS J.A.

BETWEEN:

PALMA CASCIATO

Appellant

and

THE CENTENNIAL COLLEGE OF ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

[1]               The appellant’s statement of claim was dismissed on a motion to strike it. Hughes J. of the Federal Court was of the view that it did not raise any cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.

[2]               After review of the material and the pleadings, we are satisfied that the learned judge did not commit an error that would require or justify our intervention. The appellant’s cause of action appears to be rooted in claims of tort, contract and fiduciary relationships. However, it is brought against a provincially-created institution established under provincial legislation, namely the Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology Act, 2002. In our respectful view, there is no “existing body of federal law”, nor is there a “law of Canada” as the phrase is used in section 101 of the Constitution Act, 1867 upon which the claim can reasonably be based.

[3]               Furthermore, the appellant is advancing new claims for the first time on appeal. She seeks damages in the amount of two million dollars, the issuance of warrants for electronic tracking devices under the Criminal Code and the assistance of this Court in securing employment. These are all remedies that this Court has no authority to grant in the circumstances.

[4]               For these reasons, the appeal should be dismissed with costs.

“Gilles Létourneau”

“I agree

            Marc Noël J.A.”

“I agree

            John M. Evans J.A.”

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                                      A-54-06

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                      PALMA CASCIATO v. THE CENTENNIAL

                                                                        COLLEGE OF ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY

PLACE OF HEARING:                                Toronto, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING:                                  October 10, 2006

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:             LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:                                 NOËL J.A.

                                                                        EVANS J.A.

DATED:                                                         October 18, 2006

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: