Doyle v. Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, (1984) 62 N.R. 283 (FCA)

• Judge: Le Dain, Marceau and Hugessen, JJ.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: January 30, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1984), 62 N.R. 283 (FCA)

Doyle v. Res. Trade Practices (1984), 62 N.R. 283 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

John C. Doyle (applicant) v. Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (respondent) and F.H. Sparling, in his capacity as an inspector (respondent) and Canadian Javelin Ltd./Javelin International Ltd. (c/o Mr. Michel Robert, in his capacity as receiver-manager) (respondent)

Indexed As: Doyle v. Restrictive Trade Practices Commission

Federal Court of Appeal

Le Dain, Marceau and Hugessen, JJ.

January 30, 1984.

Summary:

The Restrictive Trade Practices Commission filed a report pursuant to s. 114 of the Canada Corporations Act. The report requested the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs to commence proceedings based on allegations of fraud by Doyle against Javelin International Ltd. Doyle applied to review and set aside the report. The commission moved to quash Doyle's application. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to quash.

Courts - Topic 4085

Federal Court of Appeal - Jurisdiction - Federal Court Act, s. 28 - What constitutes a "decision" for purposes of s. 28 - The Restrictive Trade Practices Commission filed a report pursuant to s. 114 of the Canada Corporations Act - The report requested the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs to commence proceedings based on allegations of fraud by Doyle against Javelin International Ltd. - The Federal Court of Appeal held that the report of the commission was a "decision" for purposes of s. 28.

Cases Noticed:

Attorney General of Canada v. Cylien, [1973] F.C. 1166, refd to. [para. 10].

B.C. Packers Ltd. v. Canada Labour Relations Board, [1973] F.C. 1194, refd to. [para. 10].

In re Anti-Dumping Act and in re Danmor Shoe Company Ltd., [1974] 1 F.C. 22; 1 N.R. 422, refd to. [paras. 10, 25].

Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. O'Keefe Breweries, 45 N.R. 126, 69 C.P.R.(2d) 136, refd to. [para. 10].

Minister of National Revenue v. Coopers and Lybrand, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 495; 24 N.R. 163, refd to. [para. 10].

In re Pergamon Press Ltd., [1971] 1 Ch. 388, refd to. [para. 10].

Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Carling O'Keefe Breweries of Canada Ltd. (1982), 45 N.R. 126; 69 C.P.R.(2d) 136, refd to. [paras. 17, 25].

Saulnier v. Quebec Police Commission, [1976] 1 S.C.R. 572; 6 N.R. 541, refd to. [paras. 20, 28].

Minister of National Revenue v. Coopers and Lybrand, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 495, 24 N.R. 163, refd to. [para. 20].

Penner et al. v. Electoral Boundaries Commission, 14 N.R. 341, refd to. [para. 25].

Re Bay, 2 N.R. 513, refd to. [para. 25].

Statutes Noticed:

Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, sect. 28 [para. 1].

Canada Corporations Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-32, sect. 114(2) [para. 2]; sect. 114(23) [para. 3]; sect. 114(24), sect. 114(25) [para. 4]; sect. 114(26) [para. 7]; sect. 114(27) [para. 6]; sect. 114(28), sect. 114(29) [para. 5].

Counsel:

Robert Decary, for the applicant;

Francois Garneau, for the respondent, F.H. Sparling;

James Mabbutt, for the respondent, Restrictive Trade Practices Commission.

This motion was heard by Le Dain, Marceau and Hugessen, JJ., of the Federal Court of Appeal at Montreal, Quebec, on November 23, 1983.

The judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal was delivered on January 30, 1984, and the following opinions were filed:

Le Dain, J. - see paragraphs 1 to 12;

Hugessen, J. - see paragraphs 13 to 21;

Marceau, J., dissenting - see paragraphs 22 to 31.