Date: 20020612
Docket: T-1529-98
Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 664
Ottawa, Ontario, Wednesday, June 12, 2002
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LEMIEUX
BETWEEN:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Applicant
- and -
NANCY GREEN and
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Respondents
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] On June 2, 2000, I allowed, in part, the judicial review launched by the Attorney General for Canada by varying, inter alia, Award #3 rendered by a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the "Tribunal"). In the Court's Order, I stated the awards to Nancy Green be implemented as soon as possible and that I may be spoken to if difficulties arose.
[2] The Tribunal's Award #3 to Nancy Green provided for a gross-up to compensate her for adverse income tax implications due to her non-receipt of annual income at the PM-06 level from the date of the discriminatory practice.
[3] The Tribunal specifically said in its Award #3 that it would retain jurisdiction concerning this issue and if a figure mutually approved could not be reached, the Tribunal would hear submissions on this issue.
[4] This Court varied the Tribunal's Award #3 only to the extent that the start date for the gross-up should be February 1989 as suggested by both the Attorney General and the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the "Commission").
[5] As I understand it, a dispute has arisen between counsel for the Attorney General, Nancy Green and the Commission as to whether the gross-up applies not only to the lump sum compensation for lost wages but to the interest award.
[6] Clearly, the Tribunal specifically retained jurisdiction concerning the gross-up issue.
[7] This Court's Order varying Tribunal Award #3 did not vary that portion of Award #3 whereby the Tribunal specifically retained jurisdiction on the issue.
[8] As a result, this issue is not one of the difficulties contemplated to be resolved by this Court.
[9] Moreover, it is inappropriate for this Court to resolve an issue which was not raised for consideration by any party in the judicial review proceedings.
[10] I conclude the Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with the problem.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that the Tribunal has jurisdiction in the matter.
"François Lemieux"
J U D G E
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1529-98
STYLE OF CAUSE: The Attorney General of Canada v. Nancy Green and others
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: June 28, 1999
REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LEMIEUX
DATED: June 12, 2002
APPEARANCES:
S. Ronald Stevenson FOR APPLICANT
Lysanne K. Lafond
Nancy Green RESPONDENT ON HER OWN BEHALF
Margaret Rose Jamieson FOR RESPONDENT (C.H.R.C.)
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Morris Rosenberg FOR APPLICANT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ms. Nancy Green RESPONDENT ON HER OWN
Etobicoke, Ontario BEHALF
Canadian Human Rights Commission FOR RESPONDENT (C.H.R.C.)
Ottawa, Ontario