Authorson v. Canada (Attorney General), (2001) 147 O.A.C. 355 (CA)

• Judge: McMurtry, C.J.O.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: June 27, 2001
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (2001), 147 O.A.C. 355 (CA)

Authorson v. Can. (A.G.) (2001), 147 O.A.C. 355 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] O.A.C. TBEd. JL.019

Joseph Patrick Authorson, by his litigation guardian, Lenore Majoros (respondent) v. The Attorney General of Canada (appellant)

(M27437; C35254)

Indexed As: Authorson v. Canada (Attorney General)

Ontario Court of Appeal

McMurtry, C.J.O.

July 9, 2001.

Summary:

The plaintiffs, a class of disabled veterans, their dependants and descendants, claimed that the Crown owed a fiduciary duty to pay them interest on surplus statutory benefits being retained and administered by Veterans Affairs Canada. The plaintiffs were granted summary judgment. The Crown appealed. The National Council of Veteran Associations applied for leave to intervene as a friend of the court.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, per McMurtry, C.J.O., dismissed the application.

Practice - Topic 687

Parties - Adding or substituting parties - Intervenors - Amicus curiae - A class of disabled veterans, their dependants and descendants claimed that the Crown owed a fiduciary duty to pay them interest on surplus statutory benefits being retained and administered by Veterans Affairs Canada - They were granted summary judgment - The Crown appealed - The National Council of Veteran Associations (NCVA), an umbrella organization of 37 associations, representing the interests of more than 200,000 military veterans, applied for leave to intervene as a friend of the court - The NCVA submitted that it could put into perspective the history and nature of the relationship between veterans and the government and the statutory scheme governing that relationship - The Ontario Court of Appeal, per McMurtry, C.J.O., declined to grant the NCVA intervenor status, where it had no special contribution to make on the issues.

Cases Noticed:

Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Co. of Canada Ltd. (1990), 74 O.R.(2d) 164 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Peixeiro v. Haberman (1994), 20 O.R.(3d) 666 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 8].

Counsel:

John Spencer and Dale Yurka, for the appellant;

David Greenaway and Peter Sengbrush, for the respondent;

Michael Koch, Clare Roughneen and Brian Forbes, for the moving party, the National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada.

This application was heard on June 27, 2001, before McMurtry, C.J.O., of the Ontario Court of Appeal, who delivered the following judgment on July 9, 2001.