Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

     T-2722-96

BETWEEN:

     BELL CANADA

     Applicant

     - and -

     CANADIAN TELEPHONE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,

     COMMUNICATIONS, ENERGY AND PAPERWORKERS

     UNION OF CANADA, FEMMES ACTION AND

     CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

     Respondents

     REASONS FOR ORDER

RICHARD J.:

     The CTEA has brought a motion to quash or dismiss Bell Canada's application for judicial review of the decision of the Human Rights Tribunal not to adjourn its hearing into a pay equity complaint. While there is jurisprudence that interlocutory decisions of administrative tribunals should only be subject to judicial review where there are special or exceptional circumstances, I am not satisfied that this determination should now be made on a motion to quash rather than at a hearing on the merits of the case.

     Judicial review proceedings are governed by the 1600 rules which provide a strict timetable for preparation for hearing and a role for the court in ensuring there is no undue delay. Interlocutory proceedings are inconsistent with the objectives of an expeditious and summary disposition of an application for judicial review. The summary dismissal of a notice of motion will only be made in very exceptional cases.1

     Accordingly, the motion to quash is dismissed.

     __________________________

     Judge

Ottawa, Ontario

February 21, 1997

__________________

1      Pharmacia Inc. v. Canada (Minister of National Health and Welfare) (1995), 58 C.P.R. (3d) 207 at 217.


FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD

COURT FILE NO.: T-2722-96

STYLE OF CAUSE: BELL CANADA v. CANADIAN TELEPHONE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ET AL.

PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Québec

DATE OF HEARING: January 22, 1997

REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RICHARD

DATED:

February 21, 1997

APPEARANCES:

Mr. Rend Duval

FOR THE INTERVENOR

Mr. Royal L. Heenan

FOR THE APPLICANT

Mr. Stanley Fisher

Mr. Thomas E.F. Brady

Mr. Peter C. Englemann

FOR THE RESPONDENT

Communications, Energy and

Paperworkers Union of Canada

Mr. Larry Steinberg

FOR THE RESPONDENT

Canadian Telephone Employees

Association

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Canadian Human Rights Commission FOR THE INTERVENOR Ottawa, Ontario

Heenan Blaikie FOR THE APPLICANT Barristers and Solicitors

Montréal, Québec

Koskie Minsky FOR THE RESPONDENT

Barristers and Solicitors Canadian Telephone Employees

Toronto, Ontario Association

Caroline Engelmann Gottheil FOR THE RESPONDENT

Barrister and Solicitors Communications, Energy and

Ottawa, OntarioPaperworkers Union of Canada

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.