Akman Management Ltd. v. Bernier, (2011) 268 Man.R.(2d) 218 (CA)

• Judge: Monnin, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
• Case Date: June 16, 2011
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (2011), 268 Man.R.(2d) 218 (CA);2011 MBCA 65

Akman Mgt. Ltd. v. Bernier (2011), 268 Man.R.(2d) 218 (CA);

      520 W.A.C. 218

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. AU.013

Akman Management Ltd. (employer/respondent) v. Raymond Bernier (employee/applicant)

(AI 11-30-07554; 2011 MBCA 65)

Indexed As: Akman Management Ltd. v. Bernier

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Monnin, J.A.

July 28, 2011.

Summary:

Bernier moved to extend the time in which to file an appeal from a decision of the Manitoba Labour Board. He alleged that the Board's decision to dismiss his claim was made in his absence due to improper and incomplete notification on the part of the Board.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal, per Monnin, J.A., granted the extension sought.

Administrative Law - Topic 2409

Natural justice - Procedure - General - Granting of extension of time - [See Practice - Topic 9002 ].

Administrative Law - Topic 2451

Natural justice - Procedure - Notice - Effect of lack of notice - [See Practice - Topic 9002 ].

Master and Servant - Topic 8357

Employment and labour standards - Jurisdiction and powers of director, tribunal, referees or officers - Appeals (incl. leave to appeal) - [See Practice - Topic 9002 ].

Practice - Topic 9002

Appeals - Notice of appeal - Extension of time for filing and serving notice of appeal - An employee moved to extend the time in which to file an appeal from a decision of the Manitoba Labour Board - He alleged that the Board's decision to dismiss his claim was made in his absence due to improper and incomplete notification on the part of the Board - The Manitoba Court of Appeal, per Monnin, J.A., granted the extension sought - The court accepted the employee's reasons for not attending the hearing as being reasonable - The employee had an arguable case, and the other criteria required to be met to obtain an extension of time were not in issue - The court granted leave to appeal on the same question of law that Twaddle, J.A., had set out in PanCanadian Computer Group Inc. v. Ward et al. (1996), i.e., "Did the Manitoba Labour Board erroneously decline jurisdiction to consider whether its earlier decision should be reopened on the ground that the party seeking relief had a valid excuse for its nonappearance?".

Cases Noticed:

Bohemier et al. v. CIBC Mortgages Inc. (2001), 160 Man.R.(2d) 39; 262 W.A.C. 39; 2001 MBCA 161, refd to. [para. 5].

Hunter v. Hunter (2000), 150 Man.R.(2d) 291; 230 W.A.C. 291; 2000 MBCA 134, refd to. [para. 5].

Zalizniak v. Zalizniak (2006), 212 Man.R.(2d) 114; 389 W.A.C. 114; 2006 MBCA 161, refd to. [para. 5].

Elias v. Wolf (2004), 190 Man.R.(2d) 40; 335 W.A.C. 40; 2004 MBCA 99, refd to. [para. 5].

Law Society of Manitoba v. Eadie, [1988] 6 W.W.R. 354; 54 Man.R.(2d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

PanCanadian Computer Group Inc. v. Ward et al. (1996), 110 Man.R.(2d) 9; 118 W.A.C. 9 (C.A.), consd. [para. 14].

2127423 Manitoba Ltd. v. Unicity Taxi Ltd. et al., [2011] Man.R.(2d) Uned. 41; 2011 MBCA 45, consd. [para. 18].

Counsel:

R. Bernier, on his own behalf;

C.G. Labman, for the respondent;

T.D. Gisser, for the Manitoba Labour Board;

M.A. Webb, for the Director of Employment Standards.

This Chambers motion was heard on June 16, 2011, before Monnin, J.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal, who delivered the following judgment, with reasons, on July 28, 2011.