The court dismissed broad discovery and production applications seeking forensic access to transit computer systems, finding them disproportionate and unsupported.
Applicants had standing because they were parties to adjudication under the FPSLR Act and thus were "directly affected" within s.18.1(1) of the Federal Courts Act; the adjudicator's conclusion that she lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate was reasonable and entitled to deference; there was no evidentiary basis to infer breach of procedural fairness, reasonable apprehension of bias, or reliance on perjured evidence; accordingly the application for judicial review was dismissed.
The Federal Court dismissed Dr. Ayangma’s motion appeal and upheld refusal to amend for perjury allegations, finding the proposed evidence peripheral and unsubstantiated.