Kaczor v. Canada (Minister of Transport), 2015 FC 698

JudgeGleason, J.
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Case DateJanuary 27, 2015
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations2015 FC 698;(2015), 482 F.T.R. 97 (FC)

Kaczor v. Can. (2015), 482 F.T.R. 97 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.010

Emilia Kaczor (applicant) v. Canada (Minister of Transport)

(respondent)

(T-1759-14; 2015 FC 698)

Indexed As: Kaczor v. Canada (Minister of Transport)

Federal Court

Gleason, J.

June 2, 2015.

Summary:

The Minister of Transport's delegate refused the applicant's application for a transportation security clearance at the Calgary International Airport. The applicant applied for judicial review.

The Federal Court dismissed the application.

Administrative Law - Topic 2266

Natural justice - The duty of fairness - What constitutes procedural fairness - [See second Aeronautics - Topic 1844 ].

Administrative Law - Topic 2272

Natural justice - The duty of fairness - Circumstances or powers to which duty applies (incl. extent of duty) - [See first Aeronautics - Topic 1844 ].

Aeronautics - Topic 1844

Airports - Operation of - Security - Security programs - Kaczor, a flight attendant, applied for a transportation security clearance (TSC) at the Calgary International Airport - The Minister of Transport's delegate refused the application based on an RCMP report which outlined Kaczor's associations with members of two criminal gangs - Kaczor applied for judicial review, arguing that she was denied procedural fairness - The Federal Court held that Kaczor was entitled to a higher degree of procedural fairness than a mere job applicant because she had already been issued a temporary permit that afforded her access to restricted areas in the airport in order to perform her job - Kaczor's situation was akin to that of applicants who faced revocation or non-renewal of a TSC as her ability to continue to perform her job duties for her employer had been impacted by the refusal of the TSC - Thus, she was entitled to be advised of the concerns respecting her TSC application and an opportunity to address those concerns before her TSC was revoked - See paragraphs 4 to 12.

Aeronautics - Topic 1844

Airports - Operation of - Security - Security programs - Kaczor, a flight attendant, applied for a transportation security clearance (TSC) at the Calgary International Airport - The Minister of Transport's delegate refused the application based on an RCMP report which outlined Kaczor's associations with members of two criminal gangs - Kaczor applied for judicial review, arguing that she was denied procedural fairness because (1) she needed to know the identity of subjects "A" and "B" in the RCMP report in order to properly respond to the Minister's concerns; (2) she needed more particulars about the concerns to properly formulate a reply; and (3) she should have been specifically told that there were concerns with her judgment, trustworthiness and reliability - The Federal Court dismissed the application - Kaczor knew the identities of subjects "A" and "B" - Otherwise, she would not have stated that she had ceased to have contact with those individuals - The letter that Kaczor received from Transport Canada advised that she had lived with a suspected gang member, was spoken to by the police when she was with a group of suspected gang members, loaned her car to a suspected gang member, and was observed arriving at a nightclub in the company of suspected gang members - These details were sufficient to allow Kaczor to reply to the concerns - It should have been obvious that Kaczor's judgment, trustworthiness and reliability were related to her suitability for a TSC - See paragraphs 13 to 27.

Aeronautics - Topic 1844

Airports - Operation of - Security - Security programs - Kaczor, a flight attendant, applied for a transportation security clearance (TSC) at the Calgary International Airport - The Minister of Transport's delegate refused the application based on an RCMP report which outlined Kaczor's associations with members of two criminal gangs between 2007 and 2010 - The Federal Court dismissed Kaczor's application for judicial review - The Minister's delegate was entitled to find on the basis of the evidence before her that Kaczor might have been a potential security threat based on her past relationships with gang members - Such relationships, by definition, gave rise to a security risk - The mere passage of time since the last of the events with which Kaczor was reproached did not mandate an opposite conclusion - This was especially so given that Kaczor did not dispute her past associations and provided explanations that were at odds with the information in her TSC application - In other cases, Kaczor provided no explanation at all - There were reasonable grounds for legitimate concern about Kaczor's trustworthiness, suitability and reliability - See paragraphs 28 to 36.

Cases Noticed:

Pouliot v. Canada (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities), [2012] F.T.R. Uned. 195; 2012 FC 347, refd to. [para. 6].

Motta v. Canada (Procureur général) (2000), 180 F.T.R. 292 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 7].

DiMartino et al. v. Canada (Minister of Transport) (2005), 272 F.T.R. 250; 2005 FC 635, refd to. [para. 9].

Rivet v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. (2007), 325 F.T.R. 178; 2007 FC 1175, refd to. [para. 9].

MacDonnell v. Canada (Attorney General) (2013), 435 F.T.R. 202; 2013 FC 719, refd to. [para. 24].

Clue v. Canada (Attorney General), [2011] F.T.R. Uned. 175; 200 A.C.W.S.(3d) 4; 2011 FC 323, refd to. [para. 28].

New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190; 372 N.R. 1; 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 844 A.P.R. 1; 2008 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 28].

Fontaine v. Transport Canada Safety and Security (2007), 313 F.T.R. 309; 2007 FC 1160, refd to. [para. 29].

Counsel:

Michael Aasen, for the applicant;

James Elford, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Michael Aasen and McLennan Ross LLP, Calgary, Alberta, for the applicant;

William F. Pentney, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Calgary, Alberta, for the respondent.

This application for judicial review was heard at Calgary, Alberta, on January 27, 2015, before Gleason, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment and reasons at Ottawa, Ontario, on June 2, 2015.

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • Britz c. Canada (Procureur général),
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • November 22, 2016
    ...observed were unclear to her, thereby failing to give her a mean-ingful opportunity to present her response [Kaczor v. Canada (Transport), 2015 FC 698] and depriv-ing her of procedural fairness. I note that in many cases, responses were given in the response letter to similarly undetailed a......
  • Ng c. Canada (Procureur général),
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 19, 2017
    ...this basis. As such the applicant submits that the Decision is analogous to one revoking an exist-ing RAIC (Kaczor v. Canada (Transport), 2015 FC 698 (Kaczor), at paragraph 12).[67] Either way, the case law recognizes that even where this “higher level” of procedural fairness ......
  • Haque v. Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • June 22, 2018
    ...2013 FC 865 at para 7; Salmon v Canada (Attorney General), 2014 FC 1098 at para 75 [Salmon]; Kaczor v Canada (Minister of Transport), 2015 FC 698 at para 32; Wu v Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 722 at para 51; and Ng v Canada (Attorney General), 2017 FC 376 at para 50). With respect to ......
  • Rudd v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 686
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • June 17, 2016
    ...(see Fontaine v Canada (Transport, Safety and Security), 2007 FC 1160, [2007] FCJ No 1513; Kaczor v Canada (Minister of Transport), 2015 FC 698, [2015] FCJ No 681; Henri v Canada (Attorney General), 2014 FC 1141, [2014] FCJ No 1266; and Rossi, above). I disagree. Every case involving the re......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • Britz c. Canada (Procureur général),
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • November 22, 2016
    ...observed were unclear to her, thereby failing to give her a mean-ingful opportunity to present her response [Kaczor v. Canada (Transport), 2015 FC 698] and depriv-ing her of procedural fairness. I note that in many cases, responses were given in the response letter to similarly undetailed a......
  • Ng c. Canada (Procureur général),
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 19, 2017
    ...this basis. As such the applicant submits that the Decision is analogous to one revoking an exist-ing RAIC (Kaczor v. Canada (Transport), 2015 FC 698 (Kaczor), at paragraph 12).[67] Either way, the case law recognizes that even where this “higher level” of procedural fairness ......
  • Haque v. Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • June 22, 2018
    ...2013 FC 865 at para 7; Salmon v Canada (Attorney General), 2014 FC 1098 at para 75 [Salmon]; Kaczor v Canada (Minister of Transport), 2015 FC 698 at para 32; Wu v Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 722 at para 51; and Ng v Canada (Attorney General), 2017 FC 376 at para 50). With respect to ......
  • Rudd v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 686
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • June 17, 2016
    ...(see Fontaine v Canada (Transport, Safety and Security), 2007 FC 1160, [2007] FCJ No 1513; Kaczor v Canada (Minister of Transport), 2015 FC 698, [2015] FCJ No 681; Henri v Canada (Attorney General), 2014 FC 1141, [2014] FCJ No 1266; and Rossi, above). I disagree. Every case involving the re......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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