Allen et al. v. Alberta et al., (2001) 286 A.R. 132 (CA)

• Judge: Côté, Berger and Wittmann, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: January 08, 2001
• Citations: (2001), 286 A.R. 132 (CA);2001 ABCA 171

Allen v. Alta. (2001), 286 A.R. 132 (CA);

    253 W.A.C. 132

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] A.R. TBEd. JL.031

Audrey Allen, William Bentley, Faye Chorney, B.C. Desai, Po Y. Fok, Cynthia Formaniuk, Larry Fraser, Cecile Gartner, George Gordon, Joseph Huba, Allan Jones, James Kocyba, Sai-Bon Lee, Patrick Malcolmson, Donald Maltais, Harold Matheson, Robert Osokin, Christine Ostanoski, George Parsons, Beverly Peterson, Satwant Rakhra, Alfred Richards, Robert Roseberg, Fernando Raul Scherpenisse, Duane Sears, Volesh Shaikh, Normin Simpson, Robin Sundstrom, Christine Valliancourt, Donna Vanderbrink, Daniel Warkentin, Edward Waud, Nyuk-Ken Wong (appellants) v. The Crown in Right of Alberta and Jim Dixon, Public Service Commissioner of Alberta (respondents)

(9903-0401-AC; 2001 ABCA 171)

Indexed As: Allen et al. v. Alberta et al.

Alberta Court of Appeal

Côté, Berger and Wittmann, JJ.A.

June 29, 2001.

Summary:

Thirty-three persons (the applicants) applied by way of notice of motion for a declaratory judgment that they were entitled to severance pay calculated in accordance with the collective agreement made between the Crown and the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees. The Crown and the Public Service Commissioner of Alberta applied under rule 129 of the Alberta Rules of Court to strike out the action on the basis that no cause of action was disclosed and it was an abuse of the process in that the court lacked jurisdiction.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 245 A.R. 32, allowed the application and stayed the action. The applicants appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal, Côté, J.A., dissenting, allowed the appeal and dismissed the motion to strike.

Labour Law - Topic 9076

Public service labour relations - Remedies - Civil action - When available - The Crown delegated regulatory services to an association and gave notice that the applicants' positions would be abolished - A letter of intent executed by the Crown and the applicants' union provided that if the applicants accepted employment with the association, they would resign from employment with the Crown and would not be entitled to severance pay under the collective agreement (the agreement) - Paragraph 8 of the letter provided that the letter was not part of the agreement and concerns were to be addressed by the parties' representative and not by way of grievance - After resigning and accepting employment with the association, the applicants commenced an action, seeking a declaration that they were entitled to severance pay - The Alberta Court of Appeal refused to strike the action for lack of jurisdiction - The letter was not part of the collective agreement - If the letter constituted a separate collective agreement, the court's jurisdiction was not ousted where paragraph 8 satisfied the requirements of s. 133 of the Labour Relations Code respecting settlement of disputes thus excluding the operation of the model clauses in s. 134.

Labour Law - Topic 9655

Public service labour relations - Collective agreement - Civil action - Jurisdiction - [See Labour Law - Topic 9076 ].

Labour Law - Topic 9746

Public service labour relations - Collective agreement - Statutory terms - To provide for the settlement of disputes - [See Labour Law - Topic 9076 ].

Practice - Topic 2203

Pleadings - Striking out pleadings - Setting aside order striking out pleadings - The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that the standard of review involving an issue of striking a pleading was one of reasonableness, absent error of law - If an error of law existed, the standard of review was correctness - See paragraph 10.

Cases Noticed:

Alberta Human Rights Commission v. Alberta Blue Cross Plan (1983), 48 A.R. 192 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Kin Franchising Ltd. v. Donco Ltd. (1993), 7 Alta. L.R.(3d) 313 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Dechant v. Stevens et al. (2001), 281 A.R. 1; 248 W.A.C. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Young Estate et al. v. TransAlta Utilities Corp. et al. (1997), 209 A.R. 89; 160 W.A.C. 89 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 12, 50].

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 8 et al. v. Health Region No. 4 (1997), 200 A.R. 175; 146 W.A.C. 175; 52 Alta. L.R.(3d) 186 (C.A.), dist. [para. 13].

Weber v. Ontario Hydro, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929; 183 N.R. 241; 82 O.A.C. 321; 125 D.L.R.(4th) 583, refd to. [paras. 14, 44].

Hunt v. T & N plc et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959; 117 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 23].

St. Anne Nackawic Pulp & Paper Co. v. Canadian Paper Workers Union, Local 219, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 704; 68 N.R. 112; 73 N.B.R.(2d) 236; 184 A.P.R. 236; 28 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 44].

Gendron v. Supply and Services Union of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, Local 50057 et al., [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1298; 109 N.R. 321; 66 Man.R.(2d) 81; [1990] 4 W.W.R. 385, refd to. [para. 44].

New Brunswick v. O'Leary, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 967; 183 N.R. 229; 163 N.B.R.(2d) 97; 419 A.P.R. 97; 125 D.L.R.(4th) 609, refd to. [para. 44].

Regina Police Association Inc. and Shotton v. Board of Police Commissioners of Regina, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 360; 251 N.R. 16; 189 Sask.R. 23; 216 W.A.C. 23; [2000] 4 W.W.R. 149, refd to. [para. 44].

Ruscetta v. Graham et al. (1998), 114 O.A.C. 320; 36 C.C.E.L.(2d) 177 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (1998), 235 N.R. 200; 120 O.A.C. 196 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 45].

Bhaduria v. Board of Education of Toronto et al. (1999), 117 O.A.C. 356; 173 D.L.R.(4th) 382 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (1999), 252 N.R. 193; 133 O.A.C. 197 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 45].

Radhakrishnan v. University of Calgary Faculty Association et al. (1995), 178 A.R. 221; 110 W.A.C. 221 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (1996), 204 N.R. 397; 200 A.R. 397; 146 W.A.C. 397 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

Johnston et al. v. Dresser Industries Canada Ltd. (1990), 36 O.A.C. 371; 75 O.R.(2d) 609 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].

Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees v. Canadian Pacific Ltd., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 495; 198 N.R. 161; 78 B.C.A.C. 162; 128 W.A.C. 162, refd to. [para. 46].

Piko v. Hudson's Bay Co. (1998), 116 O.A.C. 92; 167 D.L.R.(4th) 479 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (1999), 247 N.R. 197; 127 O.A.C. 399 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

Syndicat catholique des employés de magasins de Québec Inc. v. Compagnie Paquet Inc., [1959] S.C.R. 206; 18 D.L.R.(2d) 346, refd to. [para. 56].

Gagnon v. Canadian Merchant Service Guild and Laurentian Pilotage Authority, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 509; 53 N.R. 100; 9 D.L.R.(4th) 641, refd to. [para. 62].

Callow v. Board of Education of School District No. 45 (West Vancouver) et al. (1997), 86 B.C.A.C. 241; 142 W.A.C. 241; 29 B.C.L.R.(3d) 199 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (1997), 223 N.R. 230; 95 B.C.A.C. 238; 154 W.A.C. 238 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 62].

Holland College v. Jussaume (1991), 95 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 79; 301 A.P.R. 79; 6 C.P.C.(3d) 199 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Marriner v. Southern Alberta Institute of Technology (1990), 104 A.R. 349 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Pokonzie v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 37 et al. (1999), 244 A.R. 389; 209 W.A.C. 389 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Centre hospitalier Régina Ltée v. Prud'homme (Juge), Tribunal du travail, Montigny et autres, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1330; 111 N.R. 91; 31 Q.A.C. 269; 69 D.L.R.(4th) 609, refd to. [para. 63].

Statutes Noticed:

Labour Relations Code, S.A. 1988, c. L-12, sect. 133 [para. 29]; sect. 134 [para. 30].

Counsel:

G. Brent Gawne, for the appellants;

David J.R. Ross, Q.C., for the respondents.

This appeal was heard on January 8, 2001, by Côté, Berger and Wittmann, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The reserved reasons for judgment of the court were filed on June 29, 2001, with the following opinions:

Wittmann, J.A. (Berger, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 34;

Côté, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 35 to 65.