Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

 

Date: 20081021

Docket: A-58-08

Citation: 2008 FCA 317

 

CORAM:       NOËL J.A.

                        NADON J.A.

                        TRUDEL J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA

Appellant

 

and

 

SANDRA SIGOUIN

Respondent

 

 

 

 

Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on October 21, 2008.

Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on October 21, 2008.

 

 

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

 


 

Date: 20081021

Docket: A-58-08

Citation: 2008 FCA 317

 

CORAM:       NOËL J.A.

                        NADON J.A.

                        TRUDEL J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA

Appellant

 

and

 

SANDRA SIGOUIN

Respondent

 

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on October 21, 2008

TRUDEL J.A.

[1]               This is an appeal from a decision of Justice de Montigny (the judge) of the Federal Court (T‑1177-07) dated January 24, 2008, that allowed the respondent’s application for judicial review of an adjudicator’s decision (YM2707-7204) dated May 30, 2007, and in which the adjudicator concluded that the respondent had been dismissed for incompetence and that the employer had respected the requirements with which it had to comply.

 

[2]               While acknowledging that it was not up to him to rule on the appropriateness of the dismissal, the judge however was of the opinion that the adjudicator was at least obliged to consider the fact that no objection had ever been made against the respondent in her 20 years of service.

 

[3]               In addition, the judge made a link between the duration of the employment and the necessity for an employer to show that sufficient efforts were made to reassign the employee to some other employment in its organization.

 

[4]               In the judge’s view, it was hard to conclude that a decision which did not take those factors into account was reasonable. However, in her complaint, the respondent had invoked her 20 years of loyal service, and nothing shows that the adjudicator did not take this into consideration in his order.

 

[5]               By concluding as he did, we are of the opinion that the judge substituted his own assessment of the evidence for that of the adjudicator, which he could not do unless the adjudicator’s decision could be considered to be unreasonable on the basis of the evidence on record.

 

[6]               In addition, the judge’s criticism to the effect that the adjudicator’s decision was not supported by sufficient reasons on these points is no more acceptable, considering the reasons given by the adjudicator.

[7]               Accordingly, the appeal will be allowed with costs, the judgment of the Federal Court will be set aside, and the application for judicial review of the adjudicator’s decision will be dismissed.

 

 

 

“Johanne Trudel”

J.A.

 

 

Certified true translation

Michael Palles


FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

 

DOCKET:                                                                              A-58-08

 

(APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DE MONTIGNY OF THE FEDERAL COURT, DATED JANUARY 24, 2008, DOCKET NUMBER T-1177-07).

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                              NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA CANADA v. SANDRA SIGOUIN

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                        Montréal, Quebec

 

 

DATE OF HEARING:                                                          October 21, 2008

 

 

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

                                                                                                NADON J.A.

                                                                                                TRUDEL J.A.

 

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                            TRUDEL J.A.

 

 

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Lukasz Granosik

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

Irving Gaul

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Ogilvy Renault

Montréal, Quebec

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

Irving Gaul

Boucherville, Quebec

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.