Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Federal Court struck a judicial review application as premature, holding the workspace-allocation dispute was grievable under the FPSLRA and that no exceptional circumstances justified bypassing the grievance process.
The Court upheld the Board's interpretation as reasonable and entitled to deference under Vavilov: 'governed by performance pay' means having predominant or determinative control, and because Appendix A prescribes lockstep pay progression for LP-00 to LP-03 and in-range performance increases for LP-01 to LP-03 are small, the LP-02 salary is not governed by performance pay; therefore the Board correctly dismissed the grievance and the application is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The motion to strike the specified affidavit paragraphs was dismissed because an advance ruling striking them was not clearly warranted: paragraphs 1–13 were acceptable as background; paragraphs recounting viva voce evidence were permissible in the absence of a transcript and not shown to materially prejudice the respondent; argumentative material could be ignored by the hearing panel. The respondent was granted a 20-day extension to serve its affidavits.
Source excerpt
The Board’s interpretation that paragraph 232(c) can encompass orders for retroactive compensation was reasonable; the Board permissibly relied on persuasive obiter in Canadian Merchant Service Guild and prior Board practice; there was no basis for appellate intervention, so the application is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Board reasonably applied heightened scrutiny because the employee could not grieve independently, found on the facts that the bargaining agent's expertise produced a closed mind and a superficial analysis amounting to arbitrary conduct, and lawfully concluded there was a breach of the duty of fair representation; the Court dismissed the judicial review as the Board's decision met the reasonableness standard.
Source excerpt
The Board's finding that there was no work refusal was reasonable because the applicant admitted he had not exercised his statutory right to refuse unsafe work and was not at work when he left the premises; under the deferential reasonableness standard the Court will not interfere, and therefore the application to set aside the Board's dismissal of the reprisal complaint is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court of Appeal upheld the Board's decision as reasonable: the Board correctly found most complaints untimely, reasonably concluded there was no arguable case of a duty of fair representation within the timely window, and did not commit procedural unfairness by proceeding in writing, therefore the judicial review application is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because ADM Eid reasonably concluded the respondent proved justification for the 'disciplined for behaviours' statement and that the 'did not meet' statement was made on an occasion of qualified privilege that was not defeated by irrelevance or malice, and the Federal Court applied the correct standard of review (reasonableness).
Source excerpt
The Federal Court found the CFIA’s refusal to accept a grievance unreasonable because its reasons did not explain why an alternative statutory process barred the grievance.
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the judicial review and the motion to admit new evidence because the Board reasonably concluded there was no arguable case: the complaint sought to relitigate matters decided decades earlier, prior proceedings and decisions had already rejected the claims, no new evidence warranted reopening, allegations of procedural unfairness and bias were unsupported, and the Board acted within its statutory authority to summarily dismiss under the reasonableness standard.
Source excerpt
Explore more
