Beattie v. Canada

Beattie v. Canada

The motion to permit the appellant to argue his late-filed constitutional issues was dismissed because the s.57 constitutional notice was served on the eve of the appeal and the record lacked the necessary evidentiary foundation to adjudicate fact‑intensive s.35 and s.15 issues; constitutional challenges require adequate notice and a proper evidentiary record and, if pursued, should be brought in fresh proceedings so the factual record can be developed.

Citation
2006 FC 24
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): Bruce Allan Beattie; Defendant (respondent): Her Majesty The Queen
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Motion in Writing to Permit Constitutional Challenge on Appeal
Outcome
Appellant's motion to argue constitutional issues dismissed without costs
Legal Topics
Section 35 Constitution Act, 1982, Section 15 Charter Equality, Assignment of Treaty Annuities, Indian Act S.90, Financial Administration Act Ss.67 68, Federal Courts Act S.57, Evidentiary Requirements for Constitutional Challenges, Treaty Interpretation
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Aboriginal Law Statutory Interpretation Civil Procedure Administrative Law Section 35 Constitution Act, 1982 Section 15 Charter Equality Assignment of Treaty Annuities +5 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bruce Allan Beattie

Plaintiff (appellant)

Her Majesty The Queen

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Motion in Writing to Permit Constitutional Challenge on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should permit late-raised constitutional questions on appeal
  2. 2 Whether assignments of treaty annuity arrears are valid despite FAA s.67 and Indian Act s.90
  3. 3 Whether sufficient evidentiary record exists to adjudicate s.35 and s.15 issues

Ratio Decidendi

The motion to permit the appellant to argue his late-filed constitutional issues was dismissed because the s.57 constitutional notice was served on the eve of the appeal and the record lacked the necessary evidentiary foundation to adjudicate fact‑intensive s.35 and s.15 issues; constitutional challenges require adequate notice and a proper evidentiary record and, if pursued, should be brought in fresh proceedings so the factual record can be developed.

Court Disposition

Appellant's motion to argue constitutional issues dismissed without costs

Orders

  • Appellant's motion to argue his proposed constitutional issues is dismissed without costs.