Federal Court of Appeal sets hearings for employment insurance, labour law cases

This week, hearings scheduled before the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court involved matters relating to appointments, promotions, pensions, bargaining unit certification, civil contempt, mineral rights, transportation, radiocommunication, patents, and emergency response benefits.

Federal Court of Appeal

The court set Democracy Watch et al v. Attorney General of Canada, A-31-23 on Apr. 15, Monday. The appellants alleged that certain appointments and promotions systems were unconstitutional and violative of judicial independence principles and/or the rule of law.

The court scheduled His Majesty the King v. Robert Marcus Hirschfield, A-182-23 on Apr. 16, Tuesday. This matter involved the Pension Act, 1985 and the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, 1995. The appellant wanted to set aside an order certifying the matter as a class proceeding.

The court set Rogers Media Inc. v. Unifor, A-221-22 on Apr. 16, Tuesday. This judicial review application challenged the Canadian Industrial Relations Board’s decision on an application under s. 24(1) of the Canada Labour Code. The underlying application requested the respondent’s certification as a bargaining agent for a unit of the appellant’s employees.

The court scheduled Canadian Pacific Railway Company v. Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, A-220-23 on Apr. 17, Wednesday. The appeal in this labour law matter asked the court to dismiss the respondent’s allegations that the appellant was guilty of civil contempt of court.

The court set Air Passenger Rights v. The Attorney General of Canada et al., A-102-20 on Apr. 17, Wednesday. This judicial review application alleged that the Canadian Transportation Agency’s public statement on vouchers failed to take into account the passengers’ perspective.

The court scheduled Saulteaux First Nation v. HMTK, A-45-23 on Apr. 18, Thursday. This judicial review application sought to quash or to set aside the Specific Claims Tribunal’s decision, which allegedly unreasonably held that the mineral rights on the exchange land were more attractive than the mineral rights on the surrender land.

The court set Wieslaw Kuk v. Attorney General of Canada, A-236-23 on Apr. 18, Thursday. This appeal challenged the Federal Court’s dismissal of the appellant’s judicial review application in response to the Social Security Tribunal appeal division’s decision, which denied the appellant employment insurance benefits.

Federal Court

The court scheduled Le Ministre de L'Industrie c. Marc Blanchette, T-1456-18 on Apr. 15, Monday. The applicant requested a permanent injunction under s. 10(4) of the Radiocommunication Act, 1985 for the respondent to stop installing, operating, or possessing a radio apparatus without the required radio authorization.

On May 1, 2019, in Canada (Innovation, Science and Economic Development) v. Blanchette, 2019 FC 557, the Federal Court allowed the application for a permanent injunction. The evidence showed that the respondent committed an offence under s. 4(1) of the legislation by operating and possessing a radio apparatus without the required radio authorization, the court said.

The court set Meridian Manufacturing Inc. v. Concept Industries Ltd., T-1506-20 on Apr. 15, Monday. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s action. The defendant alleged that its Airpro system did not infringe any claims of Canadian patent 3,036,430.

On Jan. 4, 2023, in Meridian Manufacturing Inc. v. Concept Industries Ltd., 2023 FC 20, the Federal Court dismissed the motions for summary judgment. The court found that it could not decide the patent’s validity based on the facts and evidence provided by the parties.

The court scheduled Nadire Atas v. The Attorney General of Canada et al., T-721-23 on Apr. 16, Tuesday. A judicial review application tackled the issue of whether the Canadian Judicial Council executive director’s decision to screen out the applicant’s complaint about Justice D.L. Corbett was unlawful or in contravention of the applicant’s rights.

Last Feb. 14, in Atas v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FC 241, the Federal Court struck the notice of application without leave to amend and dismissed it as against Ontario’s attorney general and 14 justices.

The court set Tracy Sanders v. AGC, T-1475-23 on Apr. 16, Tuesday. This judicial review application concerned eligibility for the Canada emergency response benefit. The applicant allegedly met all the requirements and need not repay the benefits received.

The court scheduled Cecilia (Toni) Josephine Heron v. Salt River First Nation No. 195, T-642-24 on Apr. 17, Wednesday. The applicant moved for an interlocutory injunction to stay a band council resolution of the Salt River First Nation No. 195’s council.

Last Apr. 4, in Heron v. Salt River First Nation No. 195, 2024 FC 525, the Federal Court prohibited the First Nation from holding a special meeting for the purpose of voting on the applicant’s removal from the chief’s office.