Date: 20040127
Docket: A-291-03
Citation: 2004 FCA 39
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
BETWEEN:
NADA LAPLANTE, WAJID HUSSAIN and
CATHERINE DUBREUIL-MELLON
Appellants
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, BRUCE WEIR,
VERONICA PARKER-WRIGHT, ROSE SPIRITO,
FRED PREGL, BRENDA SINGREIL, PATRICK WARNER,
STEVE ROBERTSON, GEOFFREY LAROSE,
NATHALIE BELLEU, JANICE MacDONALD,
KEVIN YAMAMOTO, ROBERT BEGIN, PATRICIA
SEABROOK, AUDREY MANTHA, GERARD LEVESQUE,
JOHN ROBERTSON, ARLENE RICHARDSON,
LESLEY MARTIN, SHEILA FULLBROOK and GEOFFRY CHAPMAN
Respondents
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 27, 2004.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 27, 2004.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: RICHARD C.J.
Date: 20040127
Docket: A-291-03
Citation: 2004 FCA 39
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
BETWEEN:
NADA LAPLANTE, WAJID HUSSAIN and
CATHERINE DUBREUIL-MELLON
Appellants
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, BRUCE WEIR,
VERONICA PARKER-WRIGHT, ROSE SPIRITO,
FRED PREGL, BRENDA SINGREIL, PATRICK WARNER,
STEVE ROBERTSON, GEOFFREY LAROSE,
NATHALIE BELLEU, JANICE MacDONALD,
KEVIN YAMAMOTO, ROBERT BEGIN, PATRICIA
SEABROOK, AUDREY MANTHA, GERARD LEVESQUE,
JOHN ROBERTSON, ARLENE RICHARDSON,
LESLEY MARTIN, SHEILA FULLBROOK and GEOFFRY CHAPMAN
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 27, 2004)
RICHARD C.J.
[1] At the opening of the hearing of this appeal and in response to inquiries from members of the Court, it was disclosed that following the interlocutory ruling of October 18, 2001, which is the subject of this appeal, the Appeal Board continued its hearings on December 17, 2001 and January 7, 2002. On January 21, 2002, (File number: 01-SVC-00792, 01-SVC-00794) the Appeal Board Chairperson dismissed the appeals of the appellants. No judicial review of this final decision has been taken by any of the appellants.
[2] In its final decision, the Board referred to the interlocutory ruling which is the subject of this appeal and dismissed all the other allegations advanced by the appellants.
[3] Absent an attack on the final decision by way of judicial review, the decision of the Board of January 21, 2002 is final and this Court cannot entertain this appeal in these circumstances.
[4] Accordingly, the appeal will be quashed without costs.
"J. Richard"
Chief Justice
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-291-03
APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OR AN ORDER OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA DATED MAY 26, 2003, FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA FILE NO.
T-2071-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: NADA LAPLANTE ET AL. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA ET AL.
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: January 27, 2004
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Richard C.J., Décary, Noël JJ.A.)
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Richard C.J.
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Dougald Brown for the Appellants
Mr. J. Sanderson Graham for the Respondent, Attorney Ramona Rothschild General of Canada
Mr. Bruce Weir Respondent, on his own behalf
Mr. John P. S. Westdal for the Respondent, Rose Spirito
Mr. Patrick Warner Respondent, on his own behalf
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Nelligan O'Brien Payne LLP for the Appellants
Ottawa, Ontario
Mr. Morris Rosenberg for the Respondent, Attorney
Deputy Attorney General of Canada General of Canada
Mr. Bruce Weir Respondent, on his own behalf
Ottawa, Ontario
Sevigny Law Office for the Respondent, Rose Spirito
Ottawa, Ontario
Mr. Patrick Warner Respondent, on his own behalf
Ottawa, Ontario
Email this Content