Lam v. Canada (Attorney General)
Source text
Lam v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2010-09-07 Neutral citation 2010 FCA 222 File numbers A-423-09 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal Cour d’appel fédérale Date: 20100907 Docket: A-423-09 Citation: 2010 FCA 222 CORAM: BLAIS C.J. NOËL J.A. TRUDEL J.A. BETWEEN: THU-CUC LAM Appellant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Hearing held at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 7, 2010. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 7, 2010. REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A. Federal Court of Appeal Cour d’appel fédérale Date: 20100907 Docket: A-423-09 Citation: 2010 FCA 222 CORAM: BLAIS C.J. NOËL J.A. TRUDEL J.A. BETWEEN: THU-CUC LAM Appelant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 7, 2010) NOËL J.A. [1] We are of the view that the judge of the Federal Court, having found that the adjudicator had failed to allow the parties to make submissions on the issue of the appropriate remedy, had to refer the case back to the adjudicator for redetermination. [2] It is therefore appropriate to allow the appeal, to set aside the decision of the Federal Court and to order that the matter be referred back to the same adjudicator for redetermination of the issue of the appropriate remedy. [3] The appellant is entitled to her costs before this Court and at trial. “Marc Noël” J.A. Certified true translation Michael …
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Lam v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2010-09-07 Neutral citation 2010 FCA 222 File numbers A-423-09 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal Cour d’appel fédérale Date: 20100907 Docket: A-423-09 Citation: 2010 FCA 222 CORAM: BLAIS C.J. NOËL J.A. TRUDEL J.A. BETWEEN: THU-CUC LAM Appellant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Hearing held at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 7, 2010. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 7, 2010. REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A. Federal Court of Appeal Cour d’appel fédérale Date: 20100907 Docket: A-423-09 Citation: 2010 FCA 222 CORAM: BLAIS C.J. NOËL J.A. TRUDEL J.A. BETWEEN: THU-CUC LAM Appelant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 7, 2010) NOËL J.A. [1] We are of the view that the judge of the Federal Court, having found that the adjudicator had failed to allow the parties to make submissions on the issue of the appropriate remedy, had to refer the case back to the adjudicator for redetermination. [2] It is therefore appropriate to allow the appeal, to set aside the decision of the Federal Court and to order that the matter be referred back to the same adjudicator for redetermination of the issue of the appropriate remedy. [3] The appellant is entitled to her costs before this Court and at trial. “Marc Noël” J.A. Certified true translation Michael Palles FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-423-09 (APPEAL FROM A JUDGEMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MARTINEAU OF THE FEDERAL COURT DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 2009, DOCKET NO. T-1350-08.) STYLE OF CAUSE: THU-CUC LAM and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: September 7, 2010 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: BLAIS C.J., NOËL J.A., TRUDEL J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: NOËL J.A. APPEARANCES: James Cameron FOR THE APPELLANT Stéphan Bertrand FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Raven, Cameron, Ballantyne & Yazeck LLP/s.r.l. Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca