Bay, Re, (1974) 2 N.R. 513 (FCA)

JudgeJackett, C.J., Thurlow and Pratte, JJ.
CourtFederal Court of Appeal (Canada)
Case DateMay 01, 1974
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1974), 2 N.R. 513 (FCA)

Bay, Re (1974), 2 N.R. 513 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Re Bay

Indexed As: Bay, Re

Federal Court of Appeal

Jackett, C.J., Thurlow and Pratte, JJ.

May 1, 1974.

Summary:

This case arose out of an application to a person to have his name added to the Indian Register pursuant to s. 7 of the Indian Act. The Registrar refused to add the applicant's name to the Indian Register. The applicant applied to the Federal Court of Appeal pursuant to s. 28 of the Federal Court Act which states: "28(1) Notwithstanding section 18 or the provisions of any other Act, the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear and determine an application to review and set aside a decision or order, other than a decision or order of an administrative nature not required by law to be made on a judicial or quasi-judicial basis, made by or in the course of proceedings before a federal board, commission or other tribunal, upon the ground that the board, commission or tribunal (a) failed to observe a principle of natural justice or otherwise acted beyond or refused to exercise its jurisdiction; (b) erred in law in making its decision or order, whether or not the error appears on the face of the record; or (c) based its decision or order on an erroneous finding of fact that it made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it." The Federal Court of Appeal refused to review the decision of the Registrar because it was not a "decision" within the meaning of s. 28(1) of the Federal Court Act. The Federal Court of Appeal stated that the refusal was not a "decision" because the decision of the Registrar had no legal binding effect.

Courts - Topic 4085

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction of the Federal Court of Appeal respecting "decisions" of boards and tribunals - A person applied to have his name added to the Indian Register under s. 7 of the Indian Act - The Registrar refused the application - Whether the refusal was a "decision" within the meaning of s. 28(1) of the Federal Court Act - The Federal Court of Appeal held that the refusal was not a "decision" because the decision of the Registrar had no legal effect.

Words and Phrases

Decision - The Federal Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the word "decision" as found in s. 28(1) of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970, 2nd supp., c. 10.

Cases Noticed:

Julius v. Bishop of Oxford (1880), 5 A.C. 214 (H.L.), folld. [para. 2].

Re Danmour Shoes Co. Ltd., 1 N.R. 422, folld. [paras. 3, 22].

Statutes Noticed:

Indian Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-6, sect. 7 [para. 6].

Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970, 2nd supp., c. 10, sect. 28(1).

Counsel:

David W. Scott and George Hunter, for the applicant;

Paul Betournay, for the respondent.

This application was heard by the Federal Court of Appeal at Ottawa, Ontario, on April 30 and May 1, 1974. Judgment was delivered from the bench on May 1, 1974 and the following reasons for judgment were filed:

JACKETT, C.J. - see paragraphs 1 to 3;

THURLOW, J. - see paragraphs 4 - 15;

PRATTE, J. - see paragraphs 16 - 24.

To continue reading

Request your trial