Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Crown law - Crown liability - Administrative law - Judicial review - Courts - Jurisdiction - Respondent commencing action against federal Crown in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice for damages for breach of contract or negligence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the amended statement of claim did not attack a federal administrative decision to award two, rather than three, licences and to deny the Respondent a licence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the allegations concerning the licencing decision of the Minister did not have to be adjudicated by way of judicial review in the Federal Court - Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, s. 18.

The Respondent commenced a proceeding against the federal Crown in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Generally, the claim was for damages for breach of contract or negligence. It arose from a decision of the Ministry of Industry rejecting the Respondent’s application for a licence, but did not seek to impugn the decision. Rather, the Respondent alleged, notably, that the licensing criteria had not been applied fairly and in good faith. The Appellant brought a motion pursuant to rule 21.01(3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction. Relying on Grenier v. Canada (Attorney General) 2005, 262 D.L.R. (4th) 337 (F.C.A.), and s. 18 of the Federal Courts Act (“FCA”), the Appellant asserted that since an essential element of the claim involved an attack on a decision of a “federal board, commission or tribunal” within the meaning of the FCA, jurisdiction lay in the Federal Court. The motion was dismissed on the ground that the Appellant had not established that it was plain and obvious that the Ontario court did not have jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the claim clearly fell within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court, since it did not seek the type of relief outlined in s. 18 of the FCA. Also, it did not constitute a collateral attack of an administrative decision, since it did not seek to impugn the underlying decision to reject the application for a license.