Sivak v. Canada

Sivak v. Canada

Certification was denied because the plaintiffs failed to meet the conjunctive requirements of Rule 334.16: they did not establish that a class proceeding is the preferable procedure for the just and efficient resolution of the sole common issue and they failed to establish the adequacy and preparedness of representative plaintiffs (absence of proper affidavits, workable litigation plan, and disclosure of fee arrangements). The court concluded that the common issue (reasonable apprehension of bias from the 2009 Report) is most practically and efficiently resolved by a Rule 220 preliminary determination after disclosure and discovery, and that a class proceeding at this stage would create...

Citation
2012 FC 271
Parties
Plaintiffs: DAVID SIVAK et al.; Defendants: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Immigration/refugee Class Certification Motion and Related Judicial Review Proceedings / Decision on Certification Motion (motion Denied); Suggestion to Resolve Common Issue by Rule 220 Preliminary Determination
Outcome
Certification motion denied.
Legal Topics
Class Certification Under Federal Courts Rules, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Representative Plaintiff Requirements, Rule 220 Preliminary Determination, Judicial Review, Access to Justice
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Class Actions Administrative Law Civil Procedure Class Certification Under Federal Courts Rules Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Representative Plaintiff Requirements +3 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DAVID SIVAK et al.

Plaintiffs

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Immigration/refugee Class Certification Motion and Related Judicial Review Proceedings / Decision on Certification Motion (motion Denied); Suggestion to Resolve Common Issue by Rule 220 Preliminary Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action in respect of reasonable apprehension of bias arising from the 2009 Report
  2. 2 Whether there is an identifiable class capable of certification
  3. 3 Whether the claims raise common questions of law or fact

Ratio Decidendi

Certification was denied because the plaintiffs failed to meet the conjunctive requirements of Rule 334.16: they did not establish that a class proceeding is the preferable procedure for the just and efficient resolution of the sole common issue and they failed to establish the adequacy and preparedness of representative plaintiffs (absence of proper affidavits, workable litigation plan, and disclosure of fee arrangements). The court concluded that the common issue (reasonable apprehension of bias from the 2009 Report) is most practically and efficiently resolved by a Rule 220 preliminary determination after disclosure and discovery, and that a class proceeding at this stage would create...

Court Disposition

Certification motion denied.

Orders

  • Motion for class certification denied.
  • No order as to costs.