Ayangma v. Canada
T-34-98
Dubé J.
29/12/98
8 pp.
Two motions for summary judgments under r. 216-First motion from defendant to strike out plaintiff's statement of claim-Second motion from plaintiff to strike out statement of defence-Plaintiff completing employment application for positions of air traffic controller, flight services specialist with Transport Canada-Scored 100% on air traffic controller written aptitude test, but failed oral interview-Filed complaint against Transport Canada to Human Rights Commission alleging racial discrimination-Plaintiff filing statement of claim based on "slanderous and libelous remarks" made by John S. Navaux of Transport Canada during Canadian Human Rights Commission's investigation on November 11, 1996-Defendant stating that on November 11, 1996, Navaux, Aubry ceased to be her employees-Navaux, Aubry, other employees employed by Nav Canada Ltd., ceased to be employed by defendant on November 1, 1996-Whether Navaux, Aubry Crown servants when alleged statements made or merely witnesses summoned to testify before Canadian Human Rights Commission-Both called upon by Canadian Human Rights Commission to be interviewed concerning events occurred while employed by Transport Canada-At time of interview, not employees of Transport Canada, had no mandate to bind former employer as agents-On November 11, 1996, Navaux, Aubry not servants of Crown as defined under Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, s. 3(a)-Action against Crown not founded upon tort committed when being interviewed as witnesses-No genuine issue for trial under r. 216-Summary judgment awarded to defendant-Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment dismissed-Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 216-Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-50, s. 3(a).