Radiology Associates of Regina Medical PC Inc. v. Sun Country Regional Health Authority, (2016) 480 Sask.R. 1 (CA)

• Judge: Jackson, Caldwell and Whitmore, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: April 21, 2016
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2016), 480 Sask.R. 1 (CA);2016 SKCA 57

Radiology Assoc. v. Health Authority (2016), 480 Sask.R. 1 (CA);

    669 W.A.C. 1

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.004

Radiology Associates of Regina Medical PC Inc. (appellant/respondent/plaintiff) v. Sun Country Regional Health Authority (respondent/applicant/defendant)

(CACV2797; 2016 SKCA 57)

Indexed As: Radiology Associates of Regina Medical PC Inc. v. Sun Country Regional Health Authority

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Jackson, Caldwell and Whitmore, JJ.A.

April 21, 2016.

Summary:

A contract bound Radiology to provide "diagnostic radiological services" to Sun Country Regional Health Authority. The Authority argued that the contract did not extend to CT scans. Radiology argued that it was entitled to perform those services for the Authority under the contract. Radiology applied for an interlocutory injunction to prohibit the Authority from contracting out CT scans to a third party.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a judgment reported [2015] Sask.R. Uned. 122, denied interlocutory injunctive relief. Although Radiology raised a serious issue to be tried respecting breach of contract, there was no risk of irreparable harm where damages were an adequate alternative remedy. Radiology appealed. As the Authority had since awarded a contract for CT scans to a third party, the Authority argued that the appeal was now moot.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal quashed the appeal as moot. The court could no longer give Radiology the remedy it sought. The court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the appeal notwithstanding that it was moot. The court ordered that no costs be awarded on the mootness application and that the Authority was entitled on the quashing of the appeal to costs of appeal on the lowest column of the Court of Appeal tariff.

Courts - Topic 2286

Jurisdiction - Bars - Academic matters or moot issues - A contract bound Radiology to provide "diagnostic radiological services" to Sun Country Regional Health Authority - The Authority argued that the contract did not extend to CT scans - Radiology argued that it was entitled to perform those services for the Authority under the contract - Radiology applied for an interlocutory injunction to prohibit the Authority from contracting out CT scans to a third party - A Chambers judge denied interlocutory injunctive relief - Although Radiology raised a serious issue to be tried respecting breach of contract, there was no risk of irreparable harm where damages were an adequate alternative remedy - Radiology appealed - As the Authority had since awarded a contract for CT scans to a third party, the Authority argued that the appeal was now moot - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal quashed the appeal as moot - The court could no longer give Radiology the remedy it sought - The court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the appeal notwithstanding that it was moot - The appeal was fully argued and none of the Borowski factors impeded the court from deciding the appeal - However, the remedy would have been a declaration that an interlocutory injunction should have been granted, which had no practical value and "much potential for mischief" - The court ordered that no costs be awarded on the mootness application and that the Authority was entitled on the quashing of the appeal to costs of appeal on the lowest column of the Court of Appeal tariff - See paragraphs 1 to 49.

Practice - Topic 7106

Costs - Party and party costs - Special orders - Moot cases - [See Courts - Topic 2286 ].

Practice - Topic 8858

Appeals - Bar or loss of right of appeal - Moot issues - [See Courts - Topic 2286 ].

Counsel:

David McWhinnie and Martin Sheard, for the appellant/respondent;

Deron Kuski, Q.C., and Milad Alishahi, for the respondent/applicant.

This appeal was heard before Jackson, Caldwell and Whitmore, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

On April 21, 2016, Jackson, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.