Background: Karson Mackie sought judicial review of a Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) decision dismissing his complaint against Teamsters Canada Rail Conference for failing to represent him fairly under Section 37 of the Canada Labour Code. The Teamsters moved to strike portions of Mackie’s affidavit, arguing it contained inadmissible evidence, opinion, hearsay, and irrelevant information.

Key Legal Points:

1. Motion to Strike Evidence:

   • Teamsters challenged every paragraph of Mackie’s affidavit and several exhibits, asserting they were not before the CIRB.
   • The court emphasized that new evidence generally cannot be considered in judicial reviews unless specific exceptions apply.

2. Exceptions to General Rule:

   • New evidence may be admitted if it provides background, highlights a lack of evidence before the administrative decision-maker, or exposes procedural defects.
   • Mackie argued for the relevance of his evidence based on principles from Palmer v. The Queen, which the court found inapplicable.

3. Court’s Decision on Evidence:

   • The court struck exhibits B, D, G, H, I, J, and K from Mackie’s affidavit as they were not before the CIRB and did not meet any exceptions.
   • Specific paragraphs related to these exhibits and additional paragraphs containing opinion or argument were also struck.

Outcome: The court ordered Mackie to submit an amended affidavit and application record excluding the inadmissible evidence and arguments. No monetary award, costs, or damages were specified in this decision.