Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTES

Canadian National Railway Co. v. Ferroequus Railway Co.

02-A-10

2002 FCA 193, Décary J.A.

16/5/02

4 pp.

Canada Transportation Act, s. 29(1) requiring Canadian Transportation Agency to make decision in any proceedings before it no later than 120 days after originating documents received, unless parties agreeing to extension or regulations providing otherwise--Application for leave to appeal Agency's decision concerning Ferroequus' amended running rights application based on lack of jurisdiction as 120 days elapsed since filing thereof--Whether s. 29(1) directory or mandatory--Reference re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721 citing Montreal Street Railway Co. v. Normandin, [1917] A.C. 170 (P.C.) wherein stated when provisions of statute relate to performance of public duty, and case such that to hold null and void acts done in neglect of duty would work serious general inconvenience, or injustice to persons who have no control over those entrusted with duty, and at same time would not promote main object of Legislature, practice to hold such provisions to be directory only; neglect of them, though punishable, not affecting validity of acts done--McCain Foods Ltd. v. Canada (National Transportation Agency), [1993] 1 F.C. 583 (C.A.) relying on Manitoba Language Rights to conclude National Transportation Act, 1987, s. 165(1) directory--Although wording of s. 29(1) different from that of s. 165(1) same principle of interpretation applies--Ferroequus had no control over Agency's process, would be at serious disadvantage if Agency could no longer proceed with application--In circumstances, neither benefit nor public interest served, in requiring parties, Agency to start anew--As not raising arguable ground on which proposed appeal might succeed, application for leave dismissed--Canada Transportation Act, S.C. 1996, c. 10, s. 29(1)--National Transportation Act, 1987, R.S.C., 1985 (3rd Supp.), c. 28, s. 165(1).

 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.