Federal Court tackles matters claiming tax relief, pension benefits, compensatory damages
The Federal Court of Appeal recently dealt with lawsuits alleging torts by various federal and provincial Crown officials and abuse of authority by Canada’s chief statistician. On the other hand, the Federal Court heard transportation, tax, and Charter rights cases.
On Tuesday, the appellate court heard the appeal in Mario Ghafari v. Attorney General of Canada, A-216-22. It arose from a complaint alleging that, in 2017, Canada’s chief statistician abused authority in an internal advertised appointment process for senior methodologist positions at Statistics Canada.
A panel of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board dismissed the complaint. The applicant filed a judicial review application claiming that the employment board:
Last Thursday, the appellate court dismissed the appeal in Asghar v. Canada, 2023 FCA 132. The appellant asked for damages and other relief relating to torts allegedly committed by various federal and provincial Crown officials. Since 2007, he has been a target of chronic supervised organized crime under cross-border conspiracy, the appellant claimed.
In July 2022, a judge of the Federal Court dismissed the appellant’s claim. The appellant alleged that the judge breached his constitutional rights and the principles of fundamental justice. He asked for either a fair trial or a hearing of the default proceedings, with full default granted in the amount of roughly US$160 million or the Canadian equivalent.
The appellate court rejected the appeal. The Federal Court applied the correct test and committed no reviewable errors, the appellate court said.
On Monday, the court dealt with the case of Nazarelys Paula Mejias Turmero et al v. Air Canada et al, T-1251-19, which sought compensatory damages. The plaintiffs alleged that Air Canada gave the Canadian Border Services Agency false or incorrect information about them, delayed their transportation to Canada by one month and two days, and made them incur out-of-pocket expenses while stranded in Panama City.
The court tackled the case of Viktor Mubili v. His Majesty the King, T-74-20 on Monday. The plaintiff’s daughter worked as a medic in the Canadian Armed Forces for 11 years until she died in 2017. The plaintiff alleged that he was entitled to her pension and supplementary benefits as the residual beneficiary of her estate and that the pensions services director advanced her benefits to an impersonator.
Also on Monday, the court heard Kaitlyn Hudson Childforever et al v. Wawakapewin First Nation, T-2077-22. This was a judicial review application challenging Wawakapewin First Nation’s Band Council Resolution No. 2022-09-09, which banished the applicants from the First Nation’s lands.
The applicants wanted to continue residing on the reserve and lands. They alleged that the resolution was void, unlawful, invalid, lacking in force and effect, and violative of the principles of procedural fairness and natural justice.
On Tuesday, the court heard Rebel News Network Ltd. et al v. Canada (The Honourable Steven Guilbeault), T-489-21. In Rebel News Network Ltd. v. Guilbeault, 2023 FC 121, the applicants alleged a violation of their s. 2(b) right to freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression – including freedom of the press – under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The alleged breach occurred when Steven Guilbeault, minister of Environment and Climate Change of Canada, blocked on Twitter one of the individual applicants, who was the owner and founder of Rebel News Network Ltd.
On Tuesday, the court heard Liliana Kostic - Natioyiiputakki v. His Majesty the King et al, T-713-22. In Kostic-Natioyiiputakki v. Canada, 2022 FC 1702, the Federal Court found no palpable and overriding error in the case management judge’s order.
The Federal Court held that the judge appropriately ordered the hearing of the respondents’ motions to strike before the other motions. It rejected the applicant’s argument that the judge did not allow her to make her full submissions at the case management conference.
On Wednesday, the court heard Adrian Robinson v. Attorney General of Canada, T-1567-22. The applicant challenged the minister of national revenue’s denial of his request for relief under a “mutual agreement procedure” in a taxation treaty with the U.K.
In Robinson v. Canada (National Revenue), 2023 FC 248, the Federal Court dismissed the respondent’s motion to strike based on its alleged lack of jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. The court found that the respondent failed to meet the high burden for striking the proceeding on a preliminary basis.
