Stiles v. Canada (Attorney General), (1986) 2 F.T.R. 173 (TD)

JudgeMartin, J.
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Case DateJanuary 23, 1986
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1986), 2 F.T.R. 173 (TD)

Stiles v. Can. (A.G.) (1986), 2 F.T.R. 173 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Stiles v. Canada (Attorney General)

(No. T-2284-85)

Indexed As: Stiles v. Canada (Attorney General)

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Martin, J.

March 20, 1986.

Summary:

A R.C.M.P. officer who admitted having homosexual experiences was allegedly forced to resign and told that he would not be considered for employment in the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. The officer commenced an action in Ontario against three R.C.M.P. officers and an action in the Federal Court against the federal Crown. The Crown applied under ss. 50(1) and (2) of the Federal Court Act to stay the action pending disposition of the Ontario action. Alternatively, the Crown applied under Rules 419(1)(a) and (b) of the Federal Court Rules to strike out portions of the officer's statement of claim. In the further alternative, the Crown applied under Rule 415 for better particulars of the claims sought to be struck out.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, allowed the application in part. The court struck out the challenged claims in the statement of claim on the ground that the facts pleaded disclosed no cause of action. The court stayed all further claims except one on the ground that the same claims were advanced in the Ontario action, wherein the Crown's liability for the actions of the three R.C.M.P. officers was already engaged.

Crown - Topic 4151

Actions by and against federal Crown - Practice - Stay of proceedings - Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, ss. 50(1), (2) - Section 50(2) provided that the court shall stay an action in the Federal Court where the plaintiff has an action respecting the same claim in another court against a person who was, at the time, acting so as to engage the liability of the federal Crown - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, stayed claims in a Federal Court action against the Crown that duplicated claims in an Ontario action against three R.C.M.P. officers, because the Crown's liability was engaged in that action - The court refused to stay a claim that was not advanced in the Ontario action - See paragraphs 20 to 32.

Practice - Topic 2230

Pleadings - Striking out pleadings - Grounds - Failure to disclose cause of action - An R.C.M.P. officer brought an action against the federal Crown for a declaration that he was denied employment in the Canadian Security Intelligence Service on the ground of admitted homosexual experiences, contrary to the equality provisions of s. 15 of the Charter - The supporting facts disclosed that he did not apply for employment, but merely expressed an interest and was told that he would not be considered because he lacked the educational qualifications - The evidence was vague as to whether homosexuality precluded consideration for employment - The officer's allegations were primarily that the R.C.M.P. employed homosexuals now and that should he wish to apply for employment a refusal to consider him on the ground of homosexuality was contrary to the Charter - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, struck out the claim as disclosing no cause of action - See paragraphs 7 to 19.

Statutes Noticed:

Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, sect. 50(1), sect. 50(2) [para. 25].

Federal Court Rules, rule 415, rule 419(1)(a), rule 419(1)(b) [para. 2].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 15.

Counsel:

Janice B. Payne, for the plaintiff;

Arnold S. Fradkin, for the defendant.

Solicitors of Record:

Nelligan/Power, Ottawa, Ontario, for the plaintiff;

F. Iacobucci, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, for the defendant.

This application was heard on January 23, 1986, at Ottawa, Ontario, before Martin, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment on March 20, 1986.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • Stiles v. Canada (Attorney General), (1986) 3 F.T.R. 234 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • May 1, 1986
    ...Rules to strike out portions of the officer's statement of claim. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a decision reported 2 F.T.R. 173, allowed the application. The court struck out the challenged claims in the statement of claim on the ground that facts pleaded disclosed no cau......
1 cases
  • Stiles v. Canada (Attorney General), (1986) 3 F.T.R. 234 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • May 1, 1986
    ...Rules to strike out portions of the officer's statement of claim. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a decision reported 2 F.T.R. 173, allowed the application. The court struck out the challenged claims in the statement of claim on the ground that facts pleaded disclosed no cau......

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