Humby v. Canada (Attorney General)

Humby v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court lacks jurisdiction ratione materiae over the individual collection officers (Peddle and Taylor) because the claims against them are essentially provincial common law torts not founded on a body of federal law essential to disposition; accordingly Peddle and Taylor are struck from the style of cause; paragraphs that amount to a collateral attack on tax assessments (paragraphs 8, 12, 16 and subparagraph 29(iii)) are struck; Charter claims under ss.6(2) and 15 disclose no reasonable cause and are struck; plaintiffs must file an amended statement of claim with particulars; no stay granted and no costs awarded.

Citation
2009 FC 1238
Parties
First Plaintiff: Eli Humby; Second Plaintiff: Central Springs Ltd.; Third Plaintiff: A&E Precision Fabrication and Machine Shop Inc.; First Defendant: Attorney General of Canada; Second Defendant: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Newfoundland and Labrador, as represented by the Office of the High Sheriff; Third Defendant: Gerry Peddle; Fourth Defendant: David Taylor
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (tort, Charter and Tax Related Claims) / Motion to Strike Under Federal Courts Rules R.221 and Alternative Stay Application Under S.50 Federal Courts Act
Outcome
Motion partly allowed and partly dismissed.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Ratione Materiae, Striking Out Pleadings, Collateral Attack on Tax Assessment, Charter Remedies, Public Misfeasance, Stay Pending Tax Court Appeals
Source Language
English
Tax Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Tort Law Jurisdiction Ratione Materiae Striking Out Pleadings Collateral Attack on Tax Assessment +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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eli Humby

First Plaintiff

Central Springs Ltd.

Second Plaintiff

A&E Precision Fabrication and Machine Shop Inc.

Third Plaintiff

Attorney General of Canada

First Defendant

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Newfoundland and Labrador, as represented by the Office of the High Sheriff

Second Defendant

Gerry Peddle

Third Defendant

David Taylor

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (tort, Charter and Tax Related Claims) / Motion to Strike Under Federal Courts Rules R.221 and Alternative Stay Application Under S.50 Federal Courts Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Federal Court has jurisdiction ratione materiae over individual federal collection officers (Peddle and Taylor)
  2. 2 Whether specified paragraphs of the statement of claim disclose no reasonable cause of action (defamation, conspiracy, malicious prosecution, Charter claims)
  3. 3 Whether portions of the pleading constitute a prohibited collateral attack on tax reassessments

Ratio Decidendi

The Federal Court lacks jurisdiction ratione materiae over the individual collection officers (Peddle and Taylor) because the claims against them are essentially provincial common law torts not founded on a body of federal law essential to disposition; accordingly Peddle and Taylor are struck from the style of cause; paragraphs that amount to a collateral attack on tax assessments (paragraphs 8, 12, 16 and subparagraph 29(iii)) are struck; Charter claims under ss.6(2) and 15 disclose no reasonable cause and are struck; plaintiffs must file an amended statement of claim with particulars; no stay granted and no costs awarded.

Court Disposition

Motion partly allowed and partly dismissed.