Gariépy v. Canada
T-1107-91
Tremblay-Lamer J.
12/2/96
8 pp.
Claim for damages relating to breach of contractual obligations requiring defendant make certain efforts to find plaintiff position in Public Service-Plaintiff held two positions in federal Public Service, from 1975 to 1981 and from March 1982 to March 1984-In January 1984, she started to work in Department of Transport in Montréal-In February 1984, agreement entitled "Secondment Agreement between Transport Canada and Corporate Affairs" signed by plaintiff, Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Department of Transport and Public Service Commission-Issue herein interpretation and effects of that agreement-Starting in January 1984, plaintiff responsible for special projects in Montréal-On July 25, 1985, Deputy Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs informed plaintiff position declared surplus and would be laid off on April 1, 1986-Ultimately laid off in January 1987-Plaintiff contends Transport Canada and Public Service Commission deliberately and knowingly violated secondment agreement by failing to attempt to find her appropriate assignment-Public Service Employment Act, s. 8 providing Public Service Commission only body authorized to appoint public servant to position-Commission had not delegated power or authority to make staffing appointments in management classification, to any public servant-As plaintiff not reappointed, should have left employment on March 22, 1984-Agreement signed by parties could not give her position in Public Service-Agreement illegal and accordingly defendant could not be held liable for breach of contract-Under Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, Crown liable for wrongful acts committed by servants in so far as servants committed wrongful act in performance of duties-Crown could not be held liable in tort for acts of employees as employees not authorized-Action dismissed-Public Service Employment Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. P-33, s. 8-Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-50.