Date: 20020507
Docket: T-1119-01
Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 518
Ottawa, Ontario, May 7, 2002
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Tremblay-Lamer
BETWEEN:
STEPHEN M. BYER
Plaintiff
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA
Defendant
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The Defendant, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, seeks to quash the Plaintiff's action on the basis of paragraph 221(1)a) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106 ("the Rules") because the Plaintiff's statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action.
[2] The Plaintiff's action is based on the Defendant's failure to follow its Policy on Claims and Ex Gratia Payments. According to the Plaintiff, this policy binds the Defendant and damages result from its failure to comply with it.
[3] Contrary to a statute or a regulation, a policy does not have the force of law. This is confirmed by the jurisprudence of this Court which makes it clear that a policy is administrative in nature and as such, it is not enforceable. In Girard v. Canada (Ministre de l'Agriculture) (1994), 79 F.T.R. 219, Rouleau J. examined a Treasury Board policy similar to that which is discussed in the case at bar. In dismissing the application, Rouleau J. stated the following:
[37] A directive or policy does not have the force of law because it lacks the essential features of a regulation. The courts clearly do not intervene to enforce a rule which they consider to be essentially administrative in nature and scope.
[38] In the case at bar the administrative policy is simply an internal rule of conduct made by the Treasury Board. It was established under a general power enjoyed by the Board under s. 11(2) of the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11. Although s. 10(f) gives the Treasury Board the power to make regulations "for any other purposes necessary for the efficient administration of the public service of Canada", those concerned chose to proceed by way of a statement of policy.
[4] In the case at bar, the Plaintiff seeks to have the Defendant's policy enforced, which it cannot do in light of the above-mentioned jurisprudence. Thus, as the Plaintiff's statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action, his action is quashed pursuant to paragraph 221(1)a) of the Rules.
ORDER
The Plaintiff's action is quashed pursuant to paragraph 221(1)a) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998.
"Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"
J.F.C.C.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1119-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: Stephen M. Byer v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: May 7, 2002
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE
DATED: May 7, 2002
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Stephen M. Byer ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Me Daniel Latulippe FOR THE DEFENDANT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Stephen M. Byer ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Verdun, Québec
Mr. Morris Rosenberg FOR THE DEFENDANT
Deputy Attorney General of
Canada