Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al., (1996) 124 F.T.R. 269 (TD)

JudgeCullen, J.
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Case DateDecember 09, 1996
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1996), 124 F.T.R. 269 (TD)

Council of Cdns. v. Competition Act (1996), 124 F.T.R. 269 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Council of Canadians and James McGillivray (plaintiffs) v. Directors of Investigation and Research (Competition Act) and Hollinger Inc. (defendants)

(T-2096-96)

Indexed As: Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Cullen, J.

December 16, 1996.

Summary:

The applicants brought a motion for an extension of time to bring an application under s. 18.1 of the Federal Court Act.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the motion.

Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1

Judicial review - General - Practice - Limitation period - Extension of - The Director of Investigation and Research issued an advance ruling certificate regarding a transaction whereby Hollinger Inc. acquired effective control of Southam Inc. - The transaction was announced on May 24, 1996 - The Council of Canadians, a nonprofit organization, discussed the matter and in July sought an opinion regarding possible legal action - It was then advised of the 30 day time limit for a judicial review application - On September 6, the Council and other groups reached a consensus to support legal action - On September 18, 1996, the Council filed a notice of motion seeking an extension of time to bring an application under s. 18.1 of the Federal Court Act - McGillivray, a graduate student, joined the Council in the motion - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division dismissed the motion where the applicants failed to justify the delay - Although the Council demonstrated an intention to do something from the time it learned of the transaction, it had not demonstrated that the intent was focused on applying for judicial review - See paragraphs 1 to 14.

Practice - Topic 220

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals and corporations - Status or standing - Respecting validity of administrative action by government officials or public body - The Director of Investigation and Research issued an advance ruling certificate in respect of a transaction whereby Hollinger Inc. acquired effective control of Southam Inc. - The Council of Canadians, a nonprofit organization which provided a voice on national issues, subsequently filed a notice of motion seeking an extension of time to bring an application under s. 18.1 of the Federal Court Act - The Council was joined in the motion by McGillivray, a graduate student who was a reader of the press and involved in alternative media projects - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the motion - The court stated that even if it had found that an extension was justified, it was not satisfied that either applicant had standing where they were not directly affected by the event in issue - See paragraph 15.

Cases Noticed:

Kue v. Canada (Solicitor General) (1993), 22 Imm. L.R.(2d) 140 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 9, footnote 1].

Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Canadian Armed Forces (1994), 29 Admin. L.R.(2d) 81 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 9, footnote 2].

Shiell v. Atomic Energy Control Board (1995), 98 F.T.R. 75; 33 Admin. L.R.(2d) 122 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 15].

Counsel:

Clayton Ruby, for the applicant;

William Miller and James Sutton, for the Director of Investigation and Research;

Peter Atkinson and Fred Cass, for Hollinger Inc.

Solicitors of Record:

Ruby & Edwardh, Toronto, Ontario, for the applicant;

William J. Miller, General Counsel Industry Canada, Hull, Québec, for the Director of Investigation and Research;

Aird & Berlis, Toronto, Ontario, for Hollinger.

This motion was heard on December 9, 1996, at Toronto, Ontario, before Cullen, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on December 16, 1996.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Eco Awareness Society v. Antigonish (County) et al., 2010 NSSC 461
    • Canada
    • Nova Scotia Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
    • November 8, 2010
    ...292; 2010 NSCA 71, refd to. [para. 21]. Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al. (1996), 124 F.T.R. 269 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Weilgart et al. v. Halifax (Regional Municipality) et al. (2008), 265 N.S.R.(2d) 26; 848 A.P.R. 26; 2008 NSSC ......
  • Canadian Association of the Deaf et al. v. Canada, (2006) 298 F.T.R. 90 (FC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • February 2, 2006
    ...155; 2004 FC 658, refd to. [para. 64]. Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al. (1996), 124 F.T.R. 269 (T.D.), affd. (1997), 212 N.R. 254 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 69]. Sweet et al. v. Canada (1999), 249 N.R. 17 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. ......
  • Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al., (1997) 212 N.R. 254 (FCA)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • April 9, 1997
    ...for an extension of time to bring an application for judicial review. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a judgment reported 124 F.T.R. 269, dismissed the motion. The applicants The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1 Judicial review ......
  • Abbott et al. v. Canada, (2000) 188 F.T.R. 198 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • March 16, 2000
    ...N.R. 254 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al. (1997), 124 F.T.R. 269 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Costellow v. Somerset County Council, [1993] 1 W.L.R. 256 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. Canada v. Walker (1970), ......
4 cases
  • Eco Awareness Society v. Antigonish (County) et al., 2010 NSSC 461
    • Canada
    • Nova Scotia Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
    • November 8, 2010
    ...292; 2010 NSCA 71, refd to. [para. 21]. Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al. (1996), 124 F.T.R. 269 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Weilgart et al. v. Halifax (Regional Municipality) et al. (2008), 265 N.S.R.(2d) 26; 848 A.P.R. 26; 2008 NSSC ......
  • Canadian Association of the Deaf et al. v. Canada, (2006) 298 F.T.R. 90 (FC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • February 2, 2006
    ...155; 2004 FC 658, refd to. [para. 64]. Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al. (1996), 124 F.T.R. 269 (T.D.), affd. (1997), 212 N.R. 254 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 69]. Sweet et al. v. Canada (1999), 249 N.R. 17 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. ......
  • Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al., (1997) 212 N.R. 254 (FCA)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • April 9, 1997
    ...for an extension of time to bring an application for judicial review. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a judgment reported 124 F.T.R. 269, dismissed the motion. The applicants The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1 Judicial review ......
  • Abbott et al. v. Canada, (2000) 188 F.T.R. 198 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • March 16, 2000
    ...N.R. 254 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. Council of Canadians et al. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act et al. (1997), 124 F.T.R. 269 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Costellow v. Somerset County Council, [1993] 1 W.L.R. 256 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9]. Canada v. Walker (1970), ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT