Giroux v. Canada (Minister of Health)

Giroux v. Canada (Minister of Health) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-01-09 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 6 File numbers A-686-00 Decision Content Date: 20020109 Docket: A-686-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 6 CORAM: STONE J.A. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: DAVID GIROUX Applicant/Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH as represented by THE MINISTER OF HEALTH, THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondents Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on Wednesday, January 9, 2002. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on Wednesday, January 9, 2002. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: STONE J.A. Date: 20020109 Docket: A-686-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 6 CORAM: STONE J.A. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: DAVID GIROUX Applicant/Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH as represented by THE MINISTER OF HEALTH, THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on Wednesday, January 9, 2002.) STONE J.A. [1] This is an appeal from a judgment of Dubé J. dated October 24, 2000 dismissing an application for judicial review of a report of July 15, 1997 made by an investigator in the Recourse and Review Branch of the Public Service Commission. The complaints centred on alleged unfair treatment, breaches of the merit principle including nepotism, denial of redress rights and terminating of employment without just cause when others were retained. [2] The investigation was carried out pursuant to section 7.1 of the Public Service Employment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-33. Its purpose was to examine complaints filed by the appellant arising out of the non-renewal of his term employment as a Record /Mail Clerk at the CR-02 group level and his unsuccessful competition for an indeterminate CR-02 position during the spring and summer of 1992. The investigator concluded at the end of her report that the complaints were unfounded. [3] We are not persuaded that the appeal should succeed. In dismissing the application for judicial review Dubé J. canvassed the various issues in dispute and determined that there was no merit in the appellant's attacks on the investigator's report which he described as "detailed and comprehensive". That report, in our view, was thorough and well researched. The parties were given an opportunity before it was finalized of responding to the investigator's proposed findings. In fact the appellant did respond and further allegations were investigated. [4] In our view, the investigator's assessment was reasonably based, and the Motions Judge did not err in so viewing it and in dismissing the attacks made upon it by the appellant. The appeal will be dismissed. "A.J. STONE" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-686-00 STYLE OF CAUSE: DAVID GIROUX and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND OTHERS PLACE OF HEARING: OTTAWA, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: JANUARY 9, 2002 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT : STONE J.A. CONCURRED IN BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. DATED: JANUARY 9, 2002 APPEARANCES: Mr. Bruce Simpson FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. J. Sanderson Graham FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Barnes Sammon Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT