PRACTICE |
Contempt of Court |
Ayangma v. Canada
T-195-01
2002 FCT 79, MacKay J.
25/1/02
9 pp.
Application for show cause orders pursuant to Federal Court Rules, 1998, rr. 466(b), 467--Applicant commenced action for damages arising from wrongful process followed by Health Canada, Public Service Commission which prevented appointment to position within Health Canada--Successfully appealed appointment of third party to position applicant had applied for--Alleging defendant not complying with order of Canadian Human Rights Tribunal registered with Court in 1997--Order arising in National Capital Alliance on Race Relations (NCARR) v. Canada (Health and Welfare), [1997] C.H.R.D. No. 3 (QL)--Requiring Health Canada to address problems within staffing process, prescribing series of corrective measures, monitoring procedures designed to enable visible minority members to have promotional opportunities within department in manner consistent with Canadian Human Rights Act, s. 10--Applicant not party to order--In March 2000 Health Canada requested Public Service Commission to provide internal staffing of position--Specifically requested NCARR order be complied with, in particular term that selection boards include representation of member of visible minority group--Applicant of view selection board not including visible minority member--Public Service Appeal Board allowed appeal, prescribed corrective measures, including new competition--Plaintiff not participating in new competition--Application dismissed--Even if applicant member of visible minority intended to benefit from NCARR order, not having standing as party to proceedings leading to that order--Also not having public interest standing--Public interest plaintiff may challenge limits of administrative authority, purported to be exercised in accordance with statutory delegation where strong public interest raised before Court, interest in which plaintiff has real concern, and where absence of other reasonable, effective means of bringing issue forward for resolution: Harris v. Canada, [2000] 4 F.C. 37 (C.A.)--Reasonable, effective processes followed, led to resolution of issue i.e. cancelling of original competition, scheduling of replacement competition--Other serious procedural defects including: no evidence of continuing failure to comply with NCARR Order; documents not establishing facts properly in evidence--Other procedural issues: contempt proceedings not available against Her Majesty the Queen; federal government departments not having legal status separate from Her Majesty and not proper respondents to show cause order for alleged contempt of court order; show cause order for contempt not issued against unnamed individuals not served with notice of motion seeking order; individuals named in notice of motion only subject to show cause order if personally served with notice of motion, and prima facie evidence aware of order allegedly violated, and some evidence they, as individuals, violated order--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 466, 467--Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6, s. 10.