Federal Court of Appeal

Cases Decided in 2001

Via Rail Canada Inc. v. Canadian Transportation Agency and Council of Canadians with Disabilities
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: 01-A-13

Application for leave to appeal Agency Decisions LET-AT-R-80-2001, LET-AT-R-81-2001 and LET-AT-R-82-2001, all dated February 22, 2001, regarding an application by the Council of Canadians with Disabilities for a final order pursuant to section 172 of the Canada Transportation Act and an interim order pursuant to subsections 27(1) and 28(2) of the Canada Transportation Act directing that VIA Rail not enter into any agreement to purchase inaccessible rolling stock from Alstom Transport Limited and further for an award of costs to permit its representatives to conduct a proper inspection of the cars.

By Order of the Federal Court of Appeal dated May 1, 2001, the motion for leave to appeal and the motion for an oral hearing were denied.

Westshore Terminals Limited v. Vancouver Port Authority
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-505-00

Application for judicial review of Agency Decision No. 487-W-2000 dated July 20, 2000, in the matter of an application by Westshore Terminals Limited pursuant to section 52 of the Canada Marine Act for a determination by the Agency that there is unjust discrimination in fees fixed by the Vancouver Port Authority under subsection 49(1) of the Canada Marine Act.

By Order of the Federal Court of Appeal dated June 11, 2001, the judicial review proceedings were dismissed on consent of the parties.

Via Rail Canada Inc. v. Canadian Transportation Agency and Council of Canadians with Disabilities
Federal Court of Appeal

Court File No.: 01-A-16

Application for leave to appeal Agency Decisions LET-AT-R-176-2001 and Order No. 2001-AT-R-122 dated April 3, 2001, and Order No. T-580-01 of the Federal Court — Trial Division. The Agency decision determined that the Agency has jurisdiction to continue to consider, after the statutory deadline has expired, an application by the Council of Canadians with Disabilities for a final order pursuant to section 172 of the Canada Transportation Act and an interim order pursuant to subsections 27(1) and 28(2) of the Canada Transportation Act directing that VIA Rail not enter into any agreement to purchase inaccessible rolling stock from Alstom Transport and ordered the production of documents by VIA Rail.

By Order of the Federal Court of Appeal dated June 8, 2001, leave to appeal was dismissed.

Canadian National Railway Company v. Gordon Moffatt, Her Majesty in Right of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Canadian Transportation Agency
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-385-98

Appeal of Agency Letter-Decision No. LET-R-337-1007 dated December 17, 1997, in the matter of a request from Mr. Gordon Moffatt for the submission of a matter for final offer arbitration, pursuant to Part IV of the Canada Transportation Act.

The court upheld the Agency's decision that an intermodal rate offered by CN from Toronto or Montreal to Newfoundland was eligible for final offer arbitration under the Canada Transportation Act. Negotiations between the shipper and the railway company had been based upon a through rate where the railway company would subcontract to other carriers those portions of the through movement it would not provide. The court found that there was nothing in the law that would limit access to final offer arbitration to the rail-only portion of through movements.

The appeal was dismissed by the Federal Court of Appeal on September 24, 2001.

Canadian National Railway Company v. Gordon Moffatt, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Oceanex 1997 Inc., the Atlantic Provinces Trucking Association, Canadian Pacific Railway, Alliance of Shippers and Manufacturers Newfoundland
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-613-99

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 300-R-1999 dated June 2, 1999, relating to an objection by the Canadian National Railway Company to a submission by Mr. Gordon Moffatt pursuant to Part IV of the Canada Transportation Act.

The court ruled that under the final offer arbitration provisions of the Canada Transportation Act the Agency lacked the legal authority to examine and determine jurisdictional issues such as whether Term 32(2) of Terms of Union of Newfoundland with Canada (1949) had any impact upon railway rates quoted to Newfoundland. The court also ruled that Term 32(2) had no practical effect in the present day given CN's privatization, the elimination of laws of economic regulation in the Canadian railway industry and the closing-down of a railway in the province of Newfoundland.

The appeal was allowed by the Federal Court of Appeal on October 31, 2001.

Cases Discontinued in 2001

Algoma Central Railway Inc. v. CTA and Steve Robinson
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-517-00

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 233-R-2000 and Order No. 2000-R-102 both dated March 31, 2000, relating to a complaint filed by Steve Robinson of the City of Sault Ste. Marie pursuant to section 95 of the Canada Transportation Act concerning noise emanating from Algoma Central Railway's track 594.

On April 25, 2001, the appellant filed a Notice of Abandonment with the Federal Court of Appeal.

Canadian Shipowners Association, Chamber of Maritime Commerce, Cargill Limited, the Canadian Wheat Board and Les Silos Port-Cartier v. Laurentian Pilotage Authority, the Corporation of Lower St. Lawrence River Pilots and the Corporation of Mid-St. Lawrence River Pilots, Inc.
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: 01-A-15

Application for leave to appeal Agency Decision No. 94-W-2001 dated March 2, 2001, which recommended that the tariff proposal published by the Laurentian Pilotage Authority on September 16, 2000, be implemented.

On April 17, 2001, the Applicant filed a Notice of Abandonment with the Federal Court of Appeal.

Cases Pending in 2001

Rural Municipality of Bayne No. 371 et al. v. CTA, Canadian National Railway Company and Canadian Pacific Railway Company
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-743-00

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 445-R-2000 dated June 30, 2000, relating to a determination by the Agency regarding the impact of municipal reclamation by-laws on the net salvage value of Canadian National Railway Company lands and other assets or interests in its Cudworth subdivision in the province of Saskatchewan.

Canadian Pacific Railway v. Canadian Transportation Agency
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No. A-193-02 (formerly 01-A-4)

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 664-R-2001 dated December 21, 2001, in which the Agency concluded that it had jurisdiction to review the reasonableness of demurrage rules established by a federal railway company.

Westshore Terminals Limited v. Vancouver Port Authority
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-625-00

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 487-W-2000 dated July 20, 2000, in the matter of an application by Westshore Terminals Limited pursuant to section 52 of the Canada Marine Act for a determination by the Agency that there is unjust discrimination in fees fixed by the Vancouver Port Authority under subsection 49(1) of the Canada Marine Act.

Réal Fafard et Jacques Borduas v. Canadian National Railway Company, Ville de Saint-Basile-le-Grand and Transport Canada
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-374-01

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 18-R-2001 dated January 12, 2001, relating to an application by Réal Fafard and Jacques Borduas pursuant to section 103 of the Canada Transportation Act to construct and maintain a private level crossing across the Canadian National Railway Company right-of-way at mileage 58.84 of the St-Hyacinthe subdivision, in the town of Saint-Basile-le-Grand, in the province of Quebec.

Air Canada v. Dan Motisca and Canadian Transportation Agency
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: 01-A-14

Application for leave to appeal Agency Decision No. 99-P-A-2001 dated March 7, 2001, regarding a complaint by Mr. Dan Motisca concerning the fares offered by Air Canada on the Vancouver-Prince Rupert route.

TyCom (U.S.) Inc. v. Secunda Marine Services Limited and Atlantic Towing Limited
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-314-01

Judicial Review of Agency Decision No. 184-W-2001 dated April 12, 2001, which determined that, pursuant to subsection 8(1) of the Coasting Trade Act, there are suitable Canadian vessels available to provide the proposed service or perform the activities described in TyCom's application for a coasting trade licence.

TyCom (U.S.) Inc. v. Secunda Marine Services Limited and Atlantic Towing Limited
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-267-01

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 184-W-2001 dated April 12, 2001, which determined that, pursuant to subsection 8(1) of the Coasting Trade Act, there are suitable Canadian vessels available to provide the proposed service or perform the activities described in TyCom's application for a coasting trade licence.

Agence métropolitaine de transport et Metropolitan Railways Inc. v. Canadian Transportation Agency et al.
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-508-01

Appeal of Agency Decision No. 273-2001 dated May 24, 2001, relating to an application, filed jointly by the Agence métropolitaine de transport and Metropolitan Railways Inc. pursuant to section 91 of the Canada Transportation Act for a certificate of fitness to operate a commuter train service on the right-of-ways owned by the Canadian National Railway Company and the St. Lawrence & Hudson Railway Company Limited in the metropolitan region of Montreal, in the province of Quebec.

Ville de Montreal v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company
Federal Court of Appeal
Court File No.: A-608-01

Application for judicial review of Agency Decision No. 499-R-2001 dated September 21, 2001, relating to an application by Canadian Pacific Railway Company pursuant to section 16 of the Railway Safety Act for a determination of the apportionment of costs for the construction and future maintenance of a fence along the railway track at mileage 9.4 Lachute subdivision and Zotique-Racicot Park, Bordeaux sector of the city of Montreal, in the province of Quebec.

[ Previous | Table of Contents | Next ]