Auclair v. Canada (Attorney General)
Source text
Auclair v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-01-11 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 19 File numbers A-211-06 Decision Content Date: 20070111 Docket: A-211-06 Citation: 2007 FCA 19 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: CHRISTIAN AUCLAIR Applicant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on January 11, 2007. Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on January 11, 2007. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: Date: 20070111 Docket: A-211-06 Citation: 2007 FCA 19 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: CHRISTIAN AUCLAIR Applicant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on January 11, 2007) DÉCARY J.A. [1] In our view, Umpire Martin not only could, but had to intervene in this case. [2] In concluding that the claimant had not lost his employment through misconduct, the Board of Referees decided the following: The Board of Referees did not find that the act in question was wilful or deliberate or so reckless as to approach wilfulness to the extent that it would have resulted in the claimant losing his job [3] Since the claimant acknowledged having made abusive remarks concerning his employer, it was clear that his remarks were deliberate and voluntary. [4] Moreover, it was not for the Board of Referees to consider whether dismissal was the appropriate disciplinary action in view of the alleged mis…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Auclair v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-01-11 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 19 File numbers A-211-06 Decision Content Date: 20070111 Docket: A-211-06 Citation: 2007 FCA 19 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: CHRISTIAN AUCLAIR Applicant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on January 11, 2007. Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on January 11, 2007. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: Date: 20070111 Docket: A-211-06 Citation: 2007 FCA 19 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. BETWEEN: CHRISTIAN AUCLAIR Applicant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on January 11, 2007) DÉCARY J.A. [1] In our view, Umpire Martin not only could, but had to intervene in this case. [2] In concluding that the claimant had not lost his employment through misconduct, the Board of Referees decided the following: The Board of Referees did not find that the act in question was wilful or deliberate or so reckless as to approach wilfulness to the extent that it would have resulted in the claimant losing his job [3] Since the claimant acknowledged having made abusive remarks concerning his employer, it was clear that his remarks were deliberate and voluntary. [4] Moreover, it was not for the Board of Referees to consider whether dismissal was the appropriate disciplinary action in view of the alleged misconduct. [5] This application for judicial review will be dismissed with costs. “Robert Décary” J.A. Certified true translation Mary Jo Egan, LLB FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-211-06 STYLE OF CAUSE: christian Auclair v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF Canada PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec DATE OF HEARING: January 11, 2007 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DÉCARY J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: DÉCARY J.A. APPEARANCES Martin Savoie FOR THE APPLICANT Liliane Bruneau/ Paul Deschênes FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: CONSEIL CONJOINT NO. 91 DES TEAMSTERS DU QUÉBEC Montréal, Quebec FOR THE APPLICANT JOHN H. SIMS, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Montréal, Quebec FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca
Klouvi c. Canada (Procureur général)
2024 CAF 80