Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations v. Alliance Pipelines Ltd.
Because the National Energy Board Act provides a statutory right of appeal limited to questions of law or jurisdiction and requiring leave under s.22, and because s.18.5 of the Federal Court Act bars judicial review where a statutory appeal exists, the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the applicants' judicial...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2003 FCA 238
- Parties
- Applicant: Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations; Applicant: The Chiefs of Treaty No. 4 and Treaty No. 6; Respondent: Alliance Pipelines Ltd.; Intervener: National Energy Board
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 28 May 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review (challenging National Energy Board Decision) / Application to Federal Court of Appeal Following Amendment From Notice of Appeal to Notice of Application
- Outcome
- Application quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review Vs Statutory Appeal, Leave to Appeal, Jurisdiction, Statutory Interpretation
- 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
Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations
Applicant
The Chiefs of Treaty No. 4 and Treaty No. 6
Applicant
Alliance Pipelines Ltd.
Respondent
National Energy Board
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (challenging National Energy Board Decision) / Application to Federal Court of Appeal Following Amendment From Notice of Appeal to Notice of Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Federal Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain a judicial review when a statutory right of appeal exists
- 2 Whether the applicants were required to proceed by way of appeal under s.22 of the National Energy Board Act and obtain leave
- 3 Effect of s.18.5 of the Federal Court Act on availability of judicial review where an appeal exists
Ratio Decidendi
Because the National Energy Board Act provides a statutory right of appeal limited to questions of law or jurisdiction and requiring leave under s.22, and because s.18.5 of the Federal Court Act bars judicial review where a statutory appeal exists, the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the applicants' judicial review application and the application must be quashed.
Court Disposition
Application quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
Orders
- Application quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
- Costs to respondent fixed at $1,000.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations v. Alliance Pipelines Ltd. Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2003-05-28 Neutral citation 2003 FCA 238 File numbers A-279-01 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20030528 Docket: A-279-01 Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 238 CORAM: DÉCARY, J.A. NADON, J.A. PELLETIER, J.A. BETWEEN: FEDERATION OF SASKATCHEWAN INDIAN NATIONS; THE CHIEFS OF TREATY No. 4 AND TREATY No. 6 APPLICANTS and ALLIANCE PIPELINES LTD. (ALLIANCE) RESPONDENT and NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD INTERVENER Heard at Calgary, Alberta, on May 28, 2003. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Calgary, Alberta, on May 28, 2003. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: PELLETIER, J.A. Date: 20030528 Docket: A-279-01 Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 238 CORAM: DÉCARY, J.A. NADON, J.A. PELLETIER, J.A. BETWEEN: FEDERATION OF SASKATCHEWAN INDIAN NATIONS; THE CHIEFS OF TREATY No. 4 AND TREATY No. 6 APPLICANTS and ALLIANCE PIPELINES LTD. (ALLIANCE) RESPONDENT and NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD INTERVENER REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Calgary, Alberta on May 28, 2003.) PELLETIER, J.A.: [1] These proceedings were intitiated by the filing of a Notice of Appeal. Subsequently, leave to amend was granted transforming the Notice of Appeal into a Notice of Application. In fact, the original Notice, though styled a Notice of Appeal requested judicial review of the decision in issue. [2] While s. 28 of the Federal Court Act R.S.C. 1985 c. F-7 provides that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for judicial review of decisions of the National Energy Board, s. 18.5 of the Act also provides that judicial review is not available where a party has a right of appeal. See Union of Nova Scotia Indians v. Northeast Pipeline Management (1999), 243 N.R. 205 (C.A.) leave to appeal denied [1999] S.C.C.A. 215. [3] Section 22 of the National Energy Board Act R.S.C. 1985 c. N -7 provides that a decision of the Board may be appealed to this Court on a question of law or jurisdiction. Consequently, the applicants, who were parties to the proceedings giving rise to the decisions in issue, were bound to proceed by way of appeal. [4] However s. 22 also provides that an appeal lies only with leave of the Court. In the absence of leave being granted, this Court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. See Ville de Montréal c Compagnie des chemin de fer Canadien Pacifique, 2003 CAF 105. [5] The application will therefore be quashed for lack of jurisdiction with costs to the respondent fixed at $1,000. "J. D. Denis Pelletier" J. A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-279-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: FEDERATION OF SASKATCHEWAN INDIAN NATIONS; THE CHIEFS OF TREATY No. 4 AND TREATY No. 6 v. ALLIANCE PIPELINES LTD. (ALLIANCE) AND NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD PLACE OF HEARING: CALGARY, Alberta DATE OF HEARING: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: (DÉCARY, NADON, PELLETIER, JJ.A.) RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: PELLETIER, J.A. DATED: May 28, 2003 APPEARANCES: Mr. Darren W. Winegarden Mr. John Parsons FOR THE APPLICANTS Mr. Richard Neufeld FOR THE RESPONDENT ALLIANCE PIPELINES LTD. (ALLIANCE) Ms. Judith Hanebury, Q.C. FOR THE INTERVENER NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD LEGAL SERVICES SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Winegarden Parsons Saskatoon, Saskatchewan FOR THE APPLICANTS Fraser, Milner, Casgrain LLP Calgary, Alberta FOR THE RESPONDENT National Energy Board Legal Services Calgary, Alberta FOR THE INTERVENER