Barrons v. Canada
T-104-97
Giles A.S.P.
26/8/97
6 pp.
Defendants seek motion under R. 419 on ground Court lacking jurisdiction-Plaintiff seeking to strike notice of motion on grounds motion to strike for lack of jurisdiction should be brought under R. 401 (dealing with conditional appearances) and not R. 419-As pointed out in Bunker Ramo Corp. v. TRW Inc., [1980] 2 F.C. 488 (T.D.), where Court's jurisdiction challenged, rationae materiae, no practical need to file conditional appearance as can be no attornment to jurisdiction-Where Court's jurisdiction rationae personae challenged, conditional appearance should be entered-Fact Court may not have jurisdiction in action between subjects matter of jurisdiction rationae materiae-However, might be considered as challenge to Court's jurisdiction rationae personae and therefore might have been preferable to seek leave to file conditional appearance-Where motion filed to employ R. 419(1)(a), if found Court has jurisdiction defendants have attorned-Case not founded on contract as no evidence of any consensus-Doctrine of legitimate expectation could be applicable in income tax case to provide some relief under Act-While information in Website and declaration of Taxpayer Rights do not appear in legislation, cause of action based on legitimate expectation might exist as information in Website put there by civil servant-Court without jurisdiction for action in tort as latter not sustained by sufficient information-No cause of action within jurisdiction of Court has been shown against two civil servants mentioned in style of cause, therefore statement of claim struck as regards civil servants-Leave granted to file amended statement of claim against Crown, in accordance with reasons-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, RR. 401, 419.