Chan v. Canada (Attorney General)
Applying the reasonableness standard, the court found no reviewable error in the PSLRB's dismissal of the second set of grievances and therefore upheld the Federal Court's dismissal of the applicants' judicial review application.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 FCA 150
- Parties
- Appellant: Hanson Chan; Appellant: Dianne Christine Farkas; Appellant: David Charles Freeborn; Appellant: Glen Kawaguchi; Appellant: Danial Maehara; Appellant: Thomas Mahon; Appellant: William Gerald Martin; Appellant: Michal Stefan Walnicki; Respondent: Attorney General of Canada
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 3 May 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review of Administrative Decision / Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal From Federal Court Judgment (judicial Review Application)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs; Federal Court judgment affirmed
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Standard of Review, Reasonableness, Grievance Adjudication, Public Service Labour Relations Board
- 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
Hanson Chan
Appellant
Dianne Christine Farkas
Appellant
David Charles Freeborn
Appellant
Glen Kawaguchi
Appellant
Danial Maehara
Appellant
Thomas Mahon
Appellant
William Gerald Martin
Appellant
Michal Stefan Walnicki
Appellant
Attorney General of Canada
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Administrative Decision / Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal From Federal Court Judgment (judicial Review Application)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Public Service Labour Relations Board erred in dismissing the second set of grievances referred under s.92
- 2 Whether the Federal Court erred in dismissing the applicants' judicial review application
- 3 What is the appropriate standard of review for the Board's decision
Ratio Decidendi
Applying the reasonableness standard, the court found no reviewable error in the PSLRB's dismissal of the second set of grievances and therefore upheld the Federal Court's dismissal of the applicants' judicial review application.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs; Federal Court judgment affirmed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Judgment of the Federal Court (Gauthier J.) dated June 29, 2010 (2010 FC 708) affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Chan v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2011-05-03 Neutral citation 2011 FCA 150 File numbers A-277-10 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20110503 Docket: A-277-10 Citation: 2011 FCA 150 CORAM: NOËL J.A. SHARLOW J.A. DAWSON J.A. BETWEEN: HANSON CHAN, DIANNE CHRISTINE FARKAS, DAVID CHARLES FREEBORN, GLEN KAWAGUCHI, DANIAL MAEHARA, THOMAS MAHON, WILLIAM GERALD MARTIN, and MICHAL STEFAN WALNICKI Appellants and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 3, 2011. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 3, 2011. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A. Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20110503 Docket: A-277-10 Citation: 2011 FCA 150 CORAM: NOËL J.A. SHARLOW J.A. DAWSON J.A. BETWEEN: HANSON CHAN, DIANNE CHRISTINE FARKAS, DAVID CHARLES FREEBORN, GLEN KAWAGUCHI, DANIAL MAEHARA, THOMAS MAHON, WILLIAM GERALD MARTIN, and MICHAL STEFAN WALNICKI Appellants and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 3, 2011) SHARLOW J.A. [1] This is an appeal of the judgment of Justice Gauthier dated June 29, 2010 (2010 FC 708) dismissing the application of the appellants for judicial review of a decision of the Public Service Labour Relations Board (2009 PSLRB 86). The decision of the Board relates to two sets of grievances referred to adjudication pursuant to section 92 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-35. The Board’s decision to dismiss the second set of grievances was the subject of the application for judicial view. [2] Applying the standard of reasonableness, we are unable to detect a reviewable error in the decision under appeal. Accordingly, despite the able submissions of counsel for the appellants, this appeal will be dismissed with costs. “K. Sharlow” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-277-10 (APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE GAUTHIER DATED JUNE 29, 2010, DOCKET NO. T-1352-09) STYLE OF CAUSE: HANSON CHAN et al v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa DATE OF HEARING: May 3, 2011 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: (NOËL, SHARLOW, DAWSON JJ.A.) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: SHARLOW J.A. APPEARANCES: Andrew Raven FOR THE APPELLANTS Richard E. Fader FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazbeck LLP/s.r.l. Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANTS Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT