Canada (Attorney General) v. Meredith
The Court dismissed the appeal because the motion judge's decision to allow the amendment was a discretionary exercise that did not involve a misdirection in law or a palpable and overriding error of fact; therefore appellate intervention was not warranted in the case's specific circumstances.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2009 FCA 326
- Parties
- Appellant: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA; Respondent: ROBERT MEREDITH AND BRIAN ROACH (representing all members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police)
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 12 November 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Appeal (from Motion to Amend Application)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Pleadings, Judicial Review, Standard of Review, Discretionary Relief
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
ROBERT MEREDITH AND BRIAN ROACH (representing all members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal (from Motion to Amend Application)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the motion judge misdirected himself in law in granting the motion to amend
- 2 Whether the motion judge made a palpable and overriding error in assessing the facts such that the appellate court should intervene
Ratio Decidendi
The Court dismissed the appeal because the motion judge's decision to allow the amendment was a discretionary exercise that did not involve a misdirection in law or a palpable and overriding error of fact; therefore appellate intervention was not warranted in the case's specific circumstances.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Canada (Attorney General) v. Meredith Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2009-11-12 Neutral citation 2009 FCA 326 File numbers A-239-09 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal CANADA Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20091112 Docket: A-239-09 Citation: 2009 FCA 326 CORAM: BLAIS C.J. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. RYER J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant and ROBERT MEREDITH AND BRIAN ROACH (representing all members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police) Respondents Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 12, 2009. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 12, 2009. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: BLAIS C.J. Date: 20091112 Docket: A-239-09 Citation: 2009 FCA 326 CORAM: BLAIS C.J. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. RYER J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant and ROBERT MEREDITH AND BRIAN ROACH (representing all members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police) Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 12, 2009) BLAIS C.J. [1] This is an appeal from the June 1, 2009 decision of Justice Lemieux of the Federal Court granting a motion to amend an application for judicial review. [2] This decision to amend is a discretionary one, and should only be overturned where the motion judge misdirected himself to the applicable law or made a palpable error in the assessment of facts. [3] We have not been persuaded by the appellant in the unique and specific circumstances of this matter that we should intervene. [4] The motion judge addressed the arguments raised by the appellant in the concluding portion of his endorsement. [5] This appeal will be dismissed with costs. “Pierre Blais” Chief Justice FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-239-09 Appeal from a decision of Justice Lemieux of the Federal Court, June 1, 2009 (T-50-09). STYLE OF CAUSE: AGC v. Robert Meredith and Brian Roach PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: November 12, 2009 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: BLAIS C.J. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. RYER J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: BLAIS C.J. APPEARANCES: J. Sanderson Graham FOR THE APPELLANT Christopher Rootham FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Nelligan O'Brien Payne Barristers & Solicitors Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENTS