Federal Appeal


No breach of procedural fairness in processing of soldier’s grievance

Soldier was member of Canadian Forces since 1995. Soldier started Common Army Phase course in 2003. Soldier failed several performance objectives despite repeated attempts. Investigation regarding evaluation process revealed no discrepancies in application of course standards. Soldier filed grievance regarding his failure and included allegations of harassment. Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) dismissed grievance. Soldier brought application for judicial review. Federal Court judge concluded that there was no breach of procedural fairness in processing of grievance and that it was reasonable for CDS to dismiss grievance. Application for judicial review was dismissed. Soldier appealed. Appeal dismissed. Federal Court judge did not err in rejecting soldier’s submissions that he was denied procedural fairness. Disclosure had been adequate. Delay had not been so oppressive as to taint proceedings. It was not role of court to re-weigh evidence before CDS. Conclusions made by CDS were reasonably open to it to make and decision of CDS was reasonable. Decision fell within range of reasonable outcomes that were defensible in respect of facts and law and reasons were justifiable, transparent, and intelligible.

Moodie v. Canada (Attorney General) (Apr. 7, 2015, F.C.A., C. Michael Ryer J.A., Wyman W. Webb J.A., and David G. Near J.A., File No. A-272-14) Decision at 240 A.C.W.S. (3d) 879 was affirmed.  252 A.C.W.S. (3d) 252.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?