Aussant v. Canada (Minister of Health and Welfare)

Aussant v. Canada (Minister of Health and Welfare)

The motion was dismissed because the plaintiffs' sole evidentiary support (a solicitor's affidavit) was improper and inadequate; parallel provincial actions were actively case-managed and plaintiffs failed to show prejudice that would justify lifting the stay; the Crown's ability to plead third party claims raised jurisdictional issues under s.50.1 of the Federal Court Act that this Court could not resolve, and the Court lacks power to stay provincial superior court proceedings; these considerations militate against exercising discretion to grant the relief sought.

Citation
2002 FCT 1308
Parties
Plaintiffs (representative Action): Roberta Aussant et al.; Defendants: Her Majesty the Queen (represented by the Minister of Health and Welfare Canada and the Attorney General of Canada)
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Representative Action (class Action) for Negligence Against the Crown / Motion Under Rule 369 to Lift a Prior Stay, for Leave to Amend the Statement of Claim, and to Stay Parallel Provincial Actions; Motion Heard on the Papers and Dismissed
Outcome
Motion dismissed without costs.
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Amendment of Pleadings, Third Party Claims, Jurisdictional Limits of Federal Court (s.50.1), Admissibility of Solicitor Affidavits, Costs
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Tort Class Actions Procedural Law Public Law Stay of Proceedings Amendment of Pleadings Third Party Claims +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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roberta Aussant et al.

Plaintiffs (representative Action)

Her Majesty the Queen (represented by the Minister of Health and Welfare Canada and the Attorney General of Canada)

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Representative Action (class Action) for Negligence Against the Crown / Motion Under Rule 369 to Lift a Prior Stay, for Leave to Amend the Statement of Claim, and to Stay Parallel Provincial Actions; Motion Heard on the Papers and Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Federal Court should lift its prior stay
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs should be granted leave to amend the statement of claim
  3. 3 Whether this Court can stay parallel provincial superior court actions

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was dismissed because the plaintiffs' sole evidentiary support (a solicitor's affidavit) was improper and inadequate; parallel provincial actions were actively case-managed and plaintiffs failed to show prejudice that would justify lifting the stay; the Crown's ability to plead third party claims raised jurisdictional issues under s.50.1 of the Federal Court Act that this Court could not resolve, and the Court lacks power to stay provincial superior court proceedings; these considerations militate against exercising discretion to grant the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed without costs.

Orders

  • Motion dismissed without costs; prior stay remains in place.