Sobeys Inc. v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1000A, (1993) 62 O.A.C. 78 (DC)

• Judge: McMurtry, A.C.J.O.C., Van Camp and Steele, JJ.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: February 25, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1993), 62 O.A.C. 78 (DC)

Sobeys Inc. v. UFCW (1993), 62 O.A.C. 78 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter of the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. J-1;

And In The Matter of the Labour Relations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L-2;

And In The Matter of A Decision of the Ontario Labour Relations Board Dated September 16, 1992

Sobeys Inc. (applicant) v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1000A (respondents)

(No. 692/92)

Indexed As: Sobeys Inc. v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1000A

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

McMurtry, A.C.J.O.C., Van Camp  and Steele, JJ.

February 25, 1993.

Summary:

The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that two employees be reinstated to jobs with Sobeys Inc. Sobeys Inc. applied for judicial review and sought an interim stay of the rein­state­ment order.

The Ontario Divisional Court, in a decision reported 60 O.A.C. 218, granted the stay. The respondent union moved to set aside the order.

The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the motion and set aside the stay order.

Labour Law - Topic 825

Labour relations boards and judicial review - Procedure - Stay of proceedings - The Ontario Labour Relations Board ordered that two employees be reinstated to jobs with Sobeys Inc. - Sobeys applied for judicial review and sought an interim stay of the rein­state­ment order - The Ontario Divisional Court granted the stay - The respon­dent union moved to set aside the order - The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the motion and set aside the stay order, where the judge did not apply the strong prima facie case test and where Sobeys failed to meet that test.

Labour Law - Topic 825

Labour relations boards and judicial review - Procedure - Stay of proceedings - The Ontario Divisional Court stated that "[o]n judicial review the court should not inter­fere with the Board's deci­sion unless it is patently un­reas­onable. This is a high stan­dard and on a motion for a stay, a strong prima facie case must be made out that that high threshold can be met before a stay should be granted. The emphasis must be on the word 'strong' and it must go beyond simply what may be an arguable case" - See paragraph 5.

Cases Noticed:

Marleen Investments Ltd. v. McBride (1979), 23 O.R.(2d) 125 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 2].

Overseas Missionary Fellowship v. 578369 Ontario Ltd. (1990), 38 O.A.C. 278; 73 O.R.(2d) 73 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

Planet Development Corp. and Lester (W.W.) (1978) Ltd. v. United Associ­ation of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, Local 740, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 644; 123 N.R. 241; 88 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 15; 274 A.P.R. 15; 91 C.L.L.C. 14,002; 76 D.L.R.(4th) 389; 48 Admin. L.R. 1, refd to. [para. 4].

Met­ropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Man­itoba Food and Commercial Workers Local 832 and Labour Board (Man.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110; 73 N.R. 341; 46 Man.R. (2d) 241; 18 C.P.C. (2d) 273; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 321; 25 Admin. L.R. 20, refd to. [para. 4].

Ellis-Don Ltd. v. Labour Relations Board (Ont.) et al., [1992] O.L.R.B. Rep. June 764; 57 O.A.C. 11 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 5].

Statutes Noticed:

Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 43, sect. 21(5) [para. 1].

Counsel:

Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo, for the ap­plicants/respondents;

Lynn Bevan, for the respondent/applicant, Sobeys Inc.;

Ron Lebi, for the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

This motion was heard on February 8 and 9, 1993, before McMurtry, A.C.J.O.C., Van Camp and Steele, JJ., of the Ontario Divi­sional Court. The following judgment of the court was delivered orally by Steele, J., and was released on February 25, 1993.