Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Attorney General)
The appeals were dismissed because they were moot and the underlying issue (the validity of two subpoenas) was fact driven; therefore the Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the appeals.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2003 FCA 226
- Parties
- Appellant: The Information Commissioner of Canada; Respondent: The Attorney General of Canada; Respondent: Janice Cochrane
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 14 May 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Motion to Dismiss for Mootness at Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeals dismissed as moot
- Legal Topics
- Mootness, Subpoena Validity, Discretion to Hear Moot Appeals, Fact Driven Disputes
- 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
The Information Commissioner of Canada
Appellant
The Attorney General of Canada
Respondent
Janice Cochrane
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Dismiss for Mootness at Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeals are moot
- 2 Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to hear moot appeals
- 3 Whether the validity of two subpoenas should be determined given factual specificity
Ratio Decidendi
The appeals were dismissed because they were moot and the underlying issue (the validity of two subpoenas) was fact driven; therefore the Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the appeals.
Court Disposition
Appeals dismissed as moot
Orders
- The appeals are dismissed.
- No order is made as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2003-05-14 Neutral citation 2003 FCA 226 File numbers A-126-02 Decision Content Date: 20030514 Docket: A-126-02 A-127-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 226 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. NOËL J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA Appellant and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA and JANICE COCHRANE Respondents Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 14, 2003. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 14, 2003. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A. Date: 20030514 Docket: A-126-02 A-127-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 226 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. NOËL J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA Appellant and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA and JANICE COCHRANE Respondents REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 14, 2003 NOËL J.A. [1] At the opening of the hearing, counsel for the respondents brought a motion for the dismissal of the appeals on the basis that the issue between the parties had become moot. [2] After having considered the representations of the respective parties, we are satisfied that the present appeals are indeed moot, and as the underlying issue, which involves the validity of two subpoenas, is essentially fact driven we are not satisfied that this Court should exercise its discretion to hear the appeals. [3] The appeals will accordingly be dismissed. No order is made as to costs. "Marc Noël" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKETS:A-126-02 and A-127-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: The Information Commissioner of Canada and The Attorney General of Canada and Janice Cochrane PLACE OF HEARING:Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING:May 14, 2003 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Richard C.J., Noël, Sexton JJ.A.) RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Noël J.A. APPEARANCES: Mr. Michael Phelan Mr. Daniel Bruent Mr. Marc-Aurèle Racicot FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. Alain PréfontaineFOR THE RESPONDENTS SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ogilvy Renault Ottawa, Ontario Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENTS