PRACTICE |
Judgments and Orders |
Stay of Execution |
VIA Rail Canada Inc. v. Cairns
A-273-03
2003 FCA 319, Rothstein J.A.
13/8/03
6 pp.
Motion by applicant for stay of Canada Industrial Relations Board (Board) decision No. 230 pending judicial review of Board's decision--Application for interim stay dismissed-- Three-part test applicable on stay application found in RJR--MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311--Board arguing Court should consider public interest in permitting Board decisions to be carried out without interference by Court--Public interest alone does not immunize decision from stay--When evidence of irreparable harm to applicant and evidence supporting applicant's balance of convenience arguments, no evidence contrary and consent or no position taken by respondents, open to Court to exercise discretion to grant stay--Not practical to consider privative clause ub Canada Lavour Code or Board's expertise on stay application--Privative clause and expertise factors to consider in pragmatic and functional analysis of standard of deference to accord Board's decision--However, on stay application, Court not deciding judicial review application--Therefore, deference not determined at stay application stage-- Regarding natural justice argument, privative clause in Canada Labour Code or Board's expertise will not protect breaches of natural justice by Board--Preferable for stay application to be considered on basis of evidence and arguments pertaining to traditional three-part test--Preferable to consider adequate alternative remedy argument at judicial review itself--Application for stay granted--Canada Labour Code R.S.C., 1985, c. L-2.