Skip to main content
Federal Court· 2006

Ellis v. Horgan

2006 FC 1086
GeneralJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Ellis v. Horgan Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2006-09-12 Neutral citation 2006 FC 1086 File numbers T-736-06 Decision Content Date: 20060912 Docket: T-736-06 Citation: 2006 FC 1086 Toronto, Ontario, September 12, 2006 PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROGER T. HUGHES BETWEEN: PATRICK ELLIS (SAULTEAUX TRIBE) Application (In the Private) and MICHAEL HORGAN CARRYING ON BUSINESS AS DEPUTY MINISTER OF INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS CANADA Response (In the Private) REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] To the extent that it is capable of being understood, this is an Application made pursuant to section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, for an Order requiring the Deputy Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, to answer a series of questions, directed in part to Her Majesty relating to jurisdictional issues over Indian persons and lands. [2] Section 18.1 provides that this Court may provide relief in respect of a decision or order of a Federal board or tribunal where the applicant is a person affected. There is no decision or order in this case that could be the subject of proceedings under section 18.1. That section does not permit the questioning of a Minister or Deputy Minister in the absence of an underlying decision or order. [3] This application is so bereft of any substance that it must be dismissed (see David Bull Laboratories (Canada) Inc. v. Pharmacia Inc., [1995] 1 FC 588). ORDER THIS COURT ORDERS that: 1. The motion to dismiss the applicatio…

Read full judgment
Ellis v. Horgan
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2006-09-12
Neutral citation
2006 FC 1086
File numbers
T-736-06
Decision Content
Date: 20060912
Docket: T-736-06
Citation: 2006 FC 1086
Toronto, Ontario, September 12, 2006
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROGER T. HUGHES
BETWEEN:
PATRICK ELLIS
(SAULTEAUX TRIBE)
Application
(In the Private)
and
MICHAEL HORGAN
CARRYING ON BUSINESS AS
DEPUTY MINISTER OF
INDIAN AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS CANADA
Response
(In the Private)
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] To the extent that it is capable of being understood, this is an Application made pursuant to section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, for an Order requiring the Deputy Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, to answer a series of questions, directed in part to Her Majesty relating to jurisdictional issues over Indian persons and lands.
[2] Section 18.1 provides that this Court may provide relief in respect of a decision or order of a Federal board or tribunal where the applicant is a person affected. There is no decision or order in this case that could be the subject of proceedings under section 18.1. That section does not permit the questioning of a Minister or Deputy Minister in the absence of an underlying decision or order.
[3] This application is so bereft of any substance that it must be dismissed (see David Bull Laboratories (Canada) Inc. v. Pharmacia Inc., [1995] 1 FC 588).
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that:
1. The motion to dismiss the application is allowed;
2. The application is dismissed;
3. No order as to costs.
“Roger T. Hughes”
JUDGE
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-736-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: PATRICK ELLIS (SAULTEAUX TRIBE); and
MICHAEL HORGAN CARRYING ON BUSINESS AS
DEPUTY MINISTER OF INDIAN AND NORTHERN
AFFAIRS CANADA
CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO PURSUANT TO RULE 369
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
AND JUDGMENT: HUGHES J.
DATED: September 12, 2006
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:
Patrick Ellis
FOR THE APPLICANT (self-represented)
Anusha Aruliah
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Patrick Ellis
P.O. Box 608
Arborg, Manitoba
R0C 0A0
FOR THE APPLICANT (self-represented)
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR THE RESPONDENT

Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca

Related cases