[2016] 4 F.C.R. D-5
Administrative Law
Judicial Review
Appeal from Federal Court (F.C.) decision quashing penalties assessed by Director of Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (Director) for three violations by respondent of Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, S.C. 2000, c. 17 — F.C. quashing penalties because of inadequacy of Director’s reasons — Correctly applying standard of reasonableness — Director’s assessment of penalties unreasonable — Director having to select monetary figure within proper range for violation when assessing penalties based on criteria set out in Act, s. 73.11, Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations, SOR/2007-292, s. 6 — Fact-based, discretionary decision made on basis of proper methodology not automatically reasonable — Reviewing court having to be satisfied, inter alia, numbers Director used in calculation of penalties supportable on evidence before him — Director deserving margin of appreciation when reviewing decision because of nature of his task — Selecting base amounts from range, applying percentage reductions of base amounts imprecise, fact-based task calling for subjective judgment informed by experience — But Director’s task must be seen in wider context — Administrative monetary penalty proceeding herein akin to disciplinary proceeding where potential significance to person accused of misconduct high — Court not satisfied figures chosen by Director underpinned or justified by some reasoning or evidence in record — Unpublished formula used by Director conflicting with s. 73.11, unfair to respondent — A few words of explanation in Director’s summary of calculation about figures for base amounts, reductions probably would have been sufficient: to enable Court to review assessment of penalties; to sufficiently inform respondent so as to knowledgeably decide whether to appeal; to fulfill Director’s responsibility to explain to public how, why public powers entrusted thereto exercised — Appeal dismissed.
Canada v. Kabul Farms Inc. (A-281-15, 2016 FCA 143, Stratas J.A., judgment dated May 6, 2016, 20 pp.)