Lee v. Canada (Attorney General)

Lee v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2012-09-19
Neutral citation
2012 FCA 241
File numbers
A-71-12
Decision Content
Date: 20120919
Docket: A-71-12
Citation: 2012 FCA 241
CORAM: NADON J.A.
DAWSON J.A.
STRATAS J.A.
BETWEEN:
JOUNG-KWANG LEE
Applicant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
and
FUTURE BAKERY LIMITED
AND BORYS WRZESNEWSKYJ
Respondents
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on September 19, 2012.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on September 19, 2012.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: STRATAS J.A.
Date: 20120919
Docket: A-71-12
Citation: 2012 FCA 241
CORAM: NADON J.A.
DAWSON J.A.
STRATAS J.A.
BETWEEN:
JOUNG-KWANG LEE
Applicant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
and
FUTURE BAKERY LIMITED
AND BORYS WRZESNEWSKYJ
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on September 19, 2012)
STRATAS J.A.
[1] The applicant has applied for judicial review in response to a decision of the Umpire on December 2, 2011. The Umpire dismissed the applicant’s appeal from the Board of Referees’ decision. The Board of Referees dismissed the applicant’s claim for employment insurance benefits.
[2] In this Court, the applicant does not seek to set aside the Umpire’s decision. Instead, in his notice of application, the applicant seeks damages and statutory employment amounts against his former employer concerning the termination of his employment. In his memorandum of fact and law, the applicant claims additional relief against his former employer and others, but, again, it is only monetary in nature.
[3] Monetary relief is not available on judicial review in our Court: Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, sections 18 and 18.1. The monetary relief the applicant seeks is normally sought in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
[4] For that reason alone, this application must be dismissed.
[5] Some statements in the applicant’s notice of application, supporting affidavit and memorandum of fact and law seem to address some of the events that form the basis of the decision of the Umpire. To the extent that these can be construed, very generously, as an attack on the Umpire’s factual findings and his overall decision, we see no reviewable error.
[6] Therefore, the application will be dismissed. The Attorney General, the only respondent appearing, does not seek his costs, and so none shall be awarded.
[7] In closing, we wish to express our appreciation for the assistance given to the Court and to the applicant by Ms. Sadian Campbell, counsel for the Attorney General.
"David Stratas"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-71-12
AN APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF REFEREES DATED SEPTEMBER 8, 2010
STYLE OF CAUSE: Joung-Kwang Lee v. Attorney General of Canada and Future Bakery Limited and Borys Wrzesnewskyj
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: September 19, 2012
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: Nadon, Dawson, Stratas JJ.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Stratas J.A.
APPEARANCES:
Joung-Kwang Lee
ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Sadian Campbell
FOR THE RESPONDENT, Attorney General of Canada
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
N/A
FOR THE APPLICANT (Self-represented)
Kuretzky Vassos Henderson LLP
Toronto, Ontario
FOR THE RESPONDENTS, Future Bakery Limited and Borys Wrzesnewskyj
Myles J. Kirvan
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR THE RESPONDENT
Attorney General of Canada