Bell Can. v. Palmer, (1974) 1 N.R. 436 (FCA)

JudgeThurlow, J., MacKay, D.J.
CourtFederal Court of Appeal (Canada)
Case DateNovember 26, 1970
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1974), 1 N.R. 436 (FCA)

Bell Can. v. Palmer (1974), 1 N.R. 436 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Bell Canada v. Palmer

Indexed As: Bell Canada v. Palmer

Federal Court of Appeal

Thurlow, J., MacKay, D.J.

and Bastin, D.J.

January 18, 1974.

Summary:

This case arose out of a complaint made by employees of Bell Canada pursuant to the provisions of the Female Employees Equal Pay Act. The employees filed a complaint with the Minister of Labour who referred the matter to a referee. The complaint was made by the employees on November 26, 1970. On July 1, 1971, the Female Employees Equal Pay Act was repealed. Bell Canada applied for a writ of prohibition to prevent the referee from taking any further proceedings pursuant to the repealed statute. The Trial Division of the Federal Court of Canada dismissed the application for a writ of prohibition by Bell Canada. On appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the Trial Division was affirmed.

The Federal Court of Appeal stated that the rights of the complainants were preserved by s. 35 of the Interpretation Act - see paragraphs 8 and 9. The Federal Court of Appeal held that the rights of the complainants accrued to the complainants at the time that they complained to the Minister and that the complainants were entitled to have the appeal procedure carried to its conclusion - see paragraphs 13 and 15.

The Female Employees Equal Pay Act was replaced by provisions in the Canada Labour (Standards) Code. The Federal Court of Appeal held that there was no substitution within the meaning of s. 36 of the Interpretation Act because there was no enforcement proceeding in the new statutes similar to the enforcement proceedings provided for in the repealed statute - see paragraphs 10 and 11.

Statutes - Topic 6903

Repeal - Preservation of rights accrued under repealed statute - The Female Employees Equal Pay Act was repealed after a complaint had been referred by the Minister of Labour to a referee - The Federal Court of Appeal held that s. 35 of the Interpretation Act preserved both the substantive rights and the procedure to enforce such rights - See paragraphs 8 and 9 - The Federal Court of Appeal held that the rights of the complainants accrued to them when they complained to the Minister and that the complainants were entitled to have the repealed procedure carried to its conclusion - See paragraphs 15.

Statutes - Topic 6904

Repeal - Substitution for a repealed statute - What constitutes a substitution - The Female Employees Equal Pay Act was repealed and in substitution sections of the Canada Labour (Standards) Code were enacted - The Federal Court of Appeal stated that there was no substitution within the meaning of s. 36 of the Interpretation Act because there was no enforcement proceeding in the new statutes similar to the enforcement proceedings in the repealed statute - See paragraphs 10 and 11.

Cases Noticed:

Director of Public Works v. Ho Po Sang, [1961] A.C. 901, dist. [para. 12].

Free Lanka Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ranasinghe, [1963] A.C. 541, folld. [para. 15].

R. v. Coles, [1970] 1 O.R. 570, folld. [para. 12].

Statutes Noticed:

Female Employees Equal Pay Act, S.C. 1956, sect. 38, sect. 4(1) [para. 2]; sect. 6 [para. 3]; sect. 7, sect. 8 [para. 4].

Canada Labour (Standards) Code, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 50, sect. 23 enacting sect. 14A [para. 6].

Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-23, sect. 35 [para. 9]; sect. 36 [para. 10].

Counsel:

B.M. Paulin, Q.C., for the appellant, Bell Canada;

No one appearing for the respondent, Earl E. Palmer;

E.A. Bowie and G.R. Garton, for the Attorney General;

Miss M.P. Hyndman, Q.C. and D. Arthurs, for Elizabeth Kennedy and Patricia Harris.

The judgment of the court was delivered by THURLOW, J.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP