Federal Appeal



Application contesting federal election results untimely

Appellant contested May 2011 federal election results in riding of Guelph, Ont. Respondent brought motion for summary dismissal. Prothonotary’s September 2013 decision dismissed appellant’s application under s. 524 of Canada Elections Act. Appellant could not establish that voter suppression efforts impacted outcome or integrity of election. Application was untimely under s. 527 of act. April 2014 decision dismissed appeal from September 2013 decision. Appeal was untimely. Appellant appealed April 2014 decision. Appeal dismissed. Appellant should have known about activity underlying application by March 29, 2012. Chief electoral officer’s testimony then entered public domain. That appellant did not actually know information because on remote island on that date did not require different result. Application was not commenced until June 26, 2012, beyond 30-day time limit under act.

Klevering v. Canada (Attorney General) (Jun. 23, 2015, F.C.A., C. Michael Ryer J.A., Wyman W. Webb J.A., and Donald J. Rennie J.A., File No. A-232-14) 256 A.C.W.S. (3d) 114.

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?