Longley v. Canada (Attorney General)

Longley v. Canada (Attorney General)

Paragraph 2 of the applications judge's order is not an order for the payment of money within the meaning of Rule 63.01 because it does not create a fixed debt obligation; applying the stay test the Attorney General demonstrated a serious issue on appeal, irreparable harm from potential politicization of the Chief Electoral Officer, and that the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo pending appeal; accordingly paragraphs 1 and 2 of the applications judge's order were stayed and the appeal expedited.

Citation
2007 ONCA 149
Parties
Respondent Individual (leader of Marijuana Party): Blair T. Longley; Respondent Individual (chief Agent, Canadian Action Party): Kevin Peck; Respondent Individual (leader, Communist Party of Canada): Miguel Figueroa; Respondent Individual (leader, Green Party of Canada): Jim Harris; Respondent Registered Political Party: Marijuana Party; Respondent Registered Political Party: Canadian Action Party; Respondent Registered Political Party: Communist Party of Canada; Respondent Registered Political Party: Green Party of Canada; Respondent Registered Political Party: Christian Heritage Party; Respondent Registered Political Party: Progressive Canadian Party; Appellant/moving Party Crown: The Attorney General
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil (charter/administrative/election Law) / In Chambers Motion to Stay Order Pending Appeal (stay Pending Appeal)
Outcome
Pending disposition of the appeal, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the applications judge's order are stayed; hearing expedited; costs of the motion payable as agreed.
Legal Topics
Charter S.3, Section 52 Declaration, Stay Pending Appeal, Public Funding of Political Parties, Role and Politicization of Chief Electoral Officer
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Election Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Charter S.3 Section 52 Declaration Stay Pending Appeal Public Funding of Political Parties +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Blair T. Longley

Respondent Individual (leader of Marijuana Party)

Kevin Peck

Respondent Individual (chief Agent, Canadian Action Party)

Miguel Figueroa

Respondent Individual (leader, Communist Party of Canada)

Jim Harris

Respondent Individual (leader, Green Party of Canada)

Marijuana Party

Respondent Registered Political Party

Canadian Action Party

Respondent Registered Political Party

Communist Party of Canada

Respondent Registered Political Party

Green Party of Canada

Respondent Registered Political Party

Christian Heritage Party

Respondent Registered Political Party

Progressive Canadian Party

Respondent Registered Political Party

The Attorney General

Appellant/moving Party Crown

Procedural Posture

Civil (charter/administrative/election Law) / In Chambers Motion to Stay Order Pending Appeal (stay Pending Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.435.01(1)(a) and (b) of the Canada Elections Act infringe s.3 of the Charter and were properly declared invalid
  2. 2 Whether the applications judge properly read-in a one-vote threshold into s.435.01(1)
  3. 3 Whether paragraph 2 (prospective payments) of the applications judge's order is an order for the payment of money and thus automatically stayed

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraph 2 of the applications judge's order is not an order for the payment of money within the meaning of Rule 63.01 because it does not create a fixed debt obligation; applying the stay test the Attorney General demonstrated a serious issue on appeal, irreparable harm from potential politicization of the Chief Electoral Officer, and that the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo pending appeal; accordingly paragraphs 1 and 2 of the applications judge's order were stayed and the appeal expedited.

Court Disposition

Pending disposition of the appeal, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the applications judge's order are stayed; hearing expedited; costs of the motion payable as agreed.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the applications judge's October 12, 2006 order are stayed pending disposition of the appeal.
  • The hearing of the appeal is expedited to June 27, 2007.