Digests

Telus Mobility v. Telecommunications Workers Union

T-425-02

2002 FCT 656, Hargrave P.

10/6/02

19 pp.

Motion for show cause order pursuant to r. 467(2) Federal Court Rules, 1998 against employer, parent company of employer, seven officers and directors--Union filing with Court arbitrator's order finding employer in violation of labour agreement and directing that violation end--Order having same force, effect as Court order--Prothonotary having authority to issue show cause order--Where prima facie case of willful and contumacious contempt of order established, prothonotary bound to order persons allegedly in contempt to appear at contempt hearing--Test that of prima facie willful disobedience: Imperial Chemical Industries PLC v. Apotex Inc. (1989), 26 F.T.R. 47 (F.C.T.D.); Chic Optic Inc. v. Hakim Optical Laboratory Ltd. (2001), 13 C.P.R. (4th) 283 (F.C.T.D.); Frank v. Bottle (1993), 68 F.T.R. 242 (F.C.T.D.)--Mens rea not factor--Lack of impairment of dignity of Court not factor in present case--Officers and directors in contempt where aiding or abetting, standing idly by, or failing to take steps to avoid contempt: Canada Metal Co. Ltd. et al. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (No. 2) (1974), 48 D.L.R. (3d) 641 (Ont. H.C.); Long Shong Pictures (H.K.) Ltd. v. NTC Entertainment Ltd. (2000), 6 C.P.R. (4th) 509 (F.C.T.D.), Glazer v. Union Contractors Ltd. and Thornton (1960), 26 D.L.R. (2d) 349 (B.C.C.A.)--Motion allowed regarding employer and Executive Vice-President of employer--Employer failing to take immediate steps to stop prima facie breach of order--No prima facie case against parent corporation Telus Communications Inc. or its directors --No responsibility for or authority over day-to-day operations of employer--Prima facie case for contempt against Executive Vice-President of employer, Wells--Wells having authority to deal with breach and not taking action to avoid or rectify breach--No prima facie case against President of employer--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 467(2).