Brink v. Canada
MICHAEL PHILIPPUS BRINK
Law Firm / Organization
Hammerco Lawyers LLP
Law Firm / Organization
Evolink Law Group
Lawyer(s)

Simon Lin

Law Firm / Organization
Independent
Lawyer(s)

Mathew P. Good

Law Firm / Organization
Hunter Litigation Chambers
FUH-CHII YANG
Law Firm / Organization
Hammerco Lawyers LLP
Law Firm / Organization
Evolink Law Group
Lawyer(s)

Simon Lin

Law Firm / Organization
Independent
Lawyer(s)

Mathew P. Good

Law Firm / Organization
Hunter Litigation Chambers

- Parties: The appellants were Michael Philippus Brink and Fuh-Chii Yang. The respondent was His Majesty the King.

- Subject Matter: The appellants’ statement of claim in a proposed class action alleged that levying or charging certain fees to individuals applying for either permanent resident status in Canada or Canadian citizenship violated s. 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because they applied only to “non-Canadian born” individuals and discriminated against these individuals based on their national or ethnic origin. The Federal Court struck out the appellants’ statement of claim without leave to amend based on a failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action and dismissed their motion to certify the action as a class proceeding.

- Ruling: The appeal court ruled in the respondent’s favour and dismissed the appeal. The appeal court concluded that the appellants’ statement of claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action. The Federal Court did not err in denying leave to the appellants to amend their statement of claim and did not err in failing to consider the criteria for certifying class actions, the appeal court said. Lastly, the appeal court did not order costs relating to the appellants’ certification motion or costs relating to the motion to strike.

- Date: The hearing was set on Dec. 13, 2023. The court released its decision on Mar. 11, 2024.

- Venue: This was a federal case before the Federal Court of Appeal.

- Amount: No financial award was specified.

Federal Court of Appeal
A-178-22
Constitutional law
$ 0
Respondent
01 September 2022