Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

PRACTICE

Parties

Joinder

Canada (Information Commissioner) v. Canada (Executive Director of the Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board)

T-465-01

2001 FCT 659, Dubé J.

14/6/01

10 pp.

NAV Canada requesting order adding it as respondent under Federal Court Rules, 1998, rr. 303(1)(a), 104(1)(b) or as intervener pursuant to r. 109--In these proceedings, Information Commissioner applying pursuant to Access to Information Act for order requiring respondent to release certain audiotapes of conversations between NAV Canada's air traffic controllers, flight crew related to air crash--Application alleging Transportation Safety Board erred in application of s. 19--Audiotapes in question provided to Transportation Safety Board by NAV CANADA, and contain voices of NAV CANADA employees while acting in course of employment--R. 303(1)(a) providing every person directly affected by order sought in application shall be named as respondent to application--R. 104(1)(b) stipulating Court may add person as party at any time, where person ought to have been joined as party--Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) (1994), 79 F.T.R. 235 (F.C.T.D.) setting out factors relevant to Court's exercise of discretion to join respondent in application for judicial review--(1) As to status of case, matter not so far advanced as to rule out addition of second respondent--(2) As to impact of decision, parties affected in addition to pilot will be NAV CANADA, employees, air traffic controllers whose voices on tape--(3) Nature of rights asserted by NAV CANADA direct, more than procedural as disclosure of information may affect relations with employees, public--(4) Nature of evidence NAV CANADA in position to adduce because of technical experience can assist Court in reaching decision--(5) Existing parties not having ability NAV CANADA offers to adduce some of relevant evidence--Application granted--NAV CANADA directly affected by order sought and should be allowed to appear as respondent--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 104(1)(b), 109, 303(1)(a).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.