Hill v. Air Canada
The motions judge did not err in concluding the appellant failed to adequately explain the 18-month delay; the appellate court will not disturb the discretionary decision and orders under the CCAA were irrelevant because they were not before the motions judge.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2006 FCA 106
- Parties
- Appellant: Yul Fernando Hill; Respondent: Air Canada
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 13 March 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal / Appeal From Motions Judge's Dismissal for Unexplained Delay in Judicial Review Proceedings
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed without costs
- Legal Topics
- Delay in Commencing Judicial Review, Discretion to Refuse Relief for Delay, Relevance of Evidence Not Before the Motions Judge, Effect of Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act Orders
- 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
Yul Fernando Hill
Appellant
Air Canada
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal / Appeal From Motions Judge's Dismissal for Unexplained Delay in Judicial Review Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the motions judge erred in finding the appellant failed to adequately explain an 18-month delay before commencing judicial review
- 2 Whether orders made under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, not before the motions judge, were relevant to his exercise of discretion
Ratio Decidendi
The motions judge did not err in concluding the appellant failed to adequately explain the 18-month delay; the appellate court will not disturb the discretionary decision and orders under the CCAA were irrelevant because they were not before the motions judge.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed without costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed without costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Hill v. Air Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-03-13 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 106 File numbers A-660-04 Decision Content Date: 20060313 Docket: A-660-04 Citation: 2006 FCA 106 CORAM: NADON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: YUL FERNANDO HILL Appellant and AIR CANADA Respondent Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on March 13, 2006. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on March 13, 2006. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NADON J.A. Date: 20060313 Docket: A-660-04 Citation: 2006 FCA 106 CORAM: NADON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: YUL FERNANDO HILL Appellant and AIR CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on March 13, 2006) NADON J.A. [1] We have not been persuaded that Mr. Justice Russell erred in the exercise of his discretion in concluding that the Appellant had failed to adequately explain the 18-month delay elapsed between the time he was notified of the decision rendered by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the time he commenced his judicial review proceedings in the Federal Court. [2] In our view, it was entirely open to the Motions Judge, on the evidence before him, to conclude as he did. [3] Notwithstanding the arguments made by both parties regarding the effect of various orders made under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, these orders were not before Russell J. and were therefore irrelevant to the exercise of his discretion. [4] The appeal will therefore be dismissed but, in the circumstances, without costs. "M. Nadon" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-660-04 STYLE OF CAUSE: Yul Fernando Hill v. Air Canada PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia DATE OF HEARING: March 13, 2006 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT : Nadon, Sharlow, Pelletier JJ.A. RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Nadon, JA DATED: March 13, 2006 APPEARANCES: Ms. Clea F. Partiff FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. Paul Fairweather FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Solicitor FOR THE APPELLANT Vancouver, British Columbia Fasken Martineau DuMoulin FOR THE RESPONDENT Vancouver, British Columbia