Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20050308

Docket: A-281-04

Citation: 2005 FCA 92

CORAM:        DESJARDINS J.A.

NADON J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             RÉAL LAMARCHE

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                           and

                                             ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                          and YVAN MARCEAU

                                                                                                                                      Respondents

                                       Hearing held at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 8, 2005.

                                  Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 8, 2005.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                                   NADON J.A.


Date: 20050308

Docket: A-281-04

Citation: 2005 FCA 92

CORAM:        DESJARDINS J.A.

NADON J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             RÉAL LAMARCHE

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                           and

                                             ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                          and YVAN MARCEAU

                                                                                                                                      Respondents

                                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                        (Delivered from the bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 8, 2005)

NADON J.A.


[1]                As the issue before the Public Service Staff Relations Board was whether respondent Marceau had refused to qualify the applicant as a candidate because of his union affiliation, it is difficult to understand why the Board refused to allow the applicant to examine the respondent Marceau concerning past events in order to possibly demonstrate an anti-union animus on his part.

[2]                Unlike the Board, which stated that such evidence would be of little relevance, we are all of the opinion that such evidence is indubitably highly relevant and, indeed, crucial to the issue before the Board, to wit, whether an anti-union animus existed against the applicant. Under the circumstances, the Board's refusal to hear this evidence is a breach of the rules of natural justice (see Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières v. Larocque, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 471, at paragraphs 46 to 52). Consequently, the Board's decision cannot be upheld.

[3]                For these reasons, the application for judicial review will be allowed with costs, the decision of the Board will be set aside and the matter will be referred back to the Board for reconsideration before a differently constituted panel.

                                                                                                                                         "M. Nadon"

                                                                                                                                                      J.A.

Certified true translation

Michael Palles


                                                  FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                                                      SOLICITORS OF RECORD

                                                                                                                                                           

DOCKET:                                               A-281-04

STYLE OF CAUSE:                               RÉAL LAMARCHE

v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

and YVAN MARCEAU     

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                         Ottawa

DATE OF HEARING:                                                           March 8, 2005

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                    Desjardins, Nadon, and Pelletier JJ.A.

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                             Nadon J.A.

APPEARANCES:

Sean McGee

Annie Berthiaume

FOR THE APPLICANT

Stéphane Hould

FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:                                                                                                          

Nelligan, O'Brien, Payne LLP

Ottawa, Ontario

FOR THE APPLICANT

John Sims, Q.C.

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

FOR THE RESPONDENT



 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.