R. v. CAE Industries Ltd.

R. v. CAE Industries Ltd.

The appeal is allowed because the Federal Court Rules and Act limit nomination for discovery to persons who are officers of the Crown at the time the discovery is to take place; a person who has ceased to be a Minister cannot be validly nominated, and Rule 5 does not permit importing provincial practice to override...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1977] 2 SCR 566
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Her Majesty The Queen; Respondent/plaintiff: CAE Industries Ltd.; Respondent/plaintiff: CAE Aircraft Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 March 1977
Procedural Posture
Appeal (federal Court Practice — Examination for Discovery) / Supreme Court of Canada Judgment on Appeal From Federal Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Examination for Discovery, Officer of the Crown, Interpretation of Court Rules, Resort to Provincial Practice, Ministerial Nomination
Source Language
english
Federal Court Procedure Civil Procedure Administrative Law Examination for Discovery Officer of the Crown Interpretation of Court Rules Resort to Provincial Practice Ministerial Nomination

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Appellant/defendant

CAE Industries Ltd.

Respondent/plaintiff

CAE Aircraft Ltd.

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal (federal Court Practice — Examination for Discovery) / Supreme Court of Canada Judgment on Appeal From Federal Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Minister of the Crown who has ceased to be a Minister can be nominated for discovery under the Federal Court Act and Rules
  2. 2 Whether the phrase 'departmental or other officer of the Crown' refers to someone who is an officer at the time the discovery is to take place
  3. 3 Whether Federal Court Rule 5 permits resort to provincial practice to fill gaps in the Federal Court Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because the Federal Court Rules and Act limit nomination for discovery to persons who are officers of the Crown at the time the discovery is to take place; a person who has ceased to be a Minister cannot be validly nominated, and Rule 5 does not permit importing provincial practice to override that limitation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Federal Court of Appeal nominating the Honourable James A. Richardson for examination for discovery vacated
  • Order of Smith D.J. dismissing the respondents' motion restored