Zerafa v. Canadian Food Inspection Agency et al., (2010) 407 F.T.R. 1 (FC)

• Judge: Crampton, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: December 17, 2010
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2010), 407 F.T.R. 1 (FC)

Zerafa v. CFIA (2010), 407 F.T.R. 1 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] F.T.R. TBEd. AP.029

Adriana Zerafa (applicant) v. Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Brian Doyle and Doyle Air Cargo Inc. (respondents)

(T-2024-10)

Indexed As: Zerafa v. Canadian Food Inspection Agency et al.

Federal Court

Crampton, J.

December 17, 2010.

Summary:

Zerafa imported two horses into Canada in contravention of the Health of Animals Act. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency issued a Notice to Remove from Canada and referred to s. 18(1)(b) of the Act. Zerafa applied for judicial review and moved for a stay of the removal order pending the hearing of the application.

The Federal Court dismissed the motion.

Administrative Law - Topic 3214.1

Judicial review - General - Stay of proceedings pending - Zerafa imported two horses into Canada in contravention of the Health of Animals Act - The Canadian Food Inspection Agency issued a Notice to Remove from Canada and referred to s. 18(1)(b) of the Act - Zerafa applied for judicial review and moved for a stay of the removal order pending the hearing of the application - The Federal Court dismissed the motion - Zerafa submitted that the Agency had not disclosed any reasonable grounds in support of its position that the horses "are or could be affected or contaminated by a disease or toxic substance," as contemplated by s. 18(1)(b) - This issue concerned the adequacy of the Agency's reasons, and was a question of procedural fairness - Accordingly, Zerafa had raised a serious issue to be tried - Further, Zerafa had demonstrated that she would suffer irreparable harm if the horses were removed where she would suffer emotionally (1) given her bond with the horses; and (2) as members of an inseparable athletic team - However, Zerafa had not demonstrated that the balance of convenience lay in her favour - The potential inconvenience and harm that Zerafa would suffer if the horses were removed from Canada and she then followed the applicable protocol to reimport the horses on a permanent basis would be less than the potential harm to the Canadian public if the horses were to remain in Canada given their ill health and the possibility of the spread of disease.

Courts - Topic 4033.4

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction - Federal Court - Stay of proceedings - Interim order pending application for judicial review - [See Administrative Law - Topic 3214.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 10].

Toth v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1988), 86 N.R. 302 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Kohl v. Canada (Minister of Agriculture) (1995), 185 N.R. 149 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Bédard v. Canada (Procureur général) et al. (1997), 128 F.T.R. 161 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20].

Hunt (David) Farms Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Agriculture) (1994), 74 F.T.R. 270 (T.D.), revd. [1994] 2 F.C. 625; 167 N.R. 116 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Archer v. Luterbach et al. (2001), 199 F.T.R. 96 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Ragupathy v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2007] 1 F.C.R. 490; 350 N.R. 137; 2006 FCA 151, refd to. [para. 24].

Law Society of Upper Canada v. Neinstein (2010), 259 O.A.C. 313; 2010 ONCA 193, refd to. [para. 24].

Clifford v. Ontario (Attorney General) et al. (2009), 256 O.A.C. 354; 2009 ONCA 670, leave to appeal dismissed (2010), 405 N.R. 388 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 24].

Zoocheck Canada Inc. et al. v. Parks Canada Agency et al. (2008), 328 F.T.R. 153; 2008 FC 540, refd to. [para. 26].

Counsel:

[None disclosed].

Solicitors of Record:

[None disclosed].

This motion was heard by Crampton, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment at Ottawa, Ontario, on December 17, 2010.