Federal Court

Administrative Law

Rule of non-interference with ongoing administrative processes vigorously enforced

Applicant sought to prohibit or restrain ongoing investigation by Public Sector Integrity Commissioner into allegations of wrongdoing made against her pursuant to s. 26 of Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (Can.). Attorney General, on behalf of named respondents, applied for order striking out applicant’s notice of application for judicial review. Attorney General claimed application was premature, as being contrary to rule of non-interference with ongoing administrative processes, which might in any event not come to conclusion against applicant, thereby rendering matter moot. Application allowed. Rule of non-interference with ongoing administrative processes was vigorously enforced, being permitted only in narrowest of exceptional circumstances measured against exceptionally high threshold. In this case, there were no exceptional circumstances that would permit interference with commissioner’s on-going investigation.

Cousineau-Mahoney v. Canada (Public Sector Integrity Commissioner) (Nov. 7, 2013, F.C., Peter Annis J., File No. T-1210-13) 235 A.C.W.S. (3d) 287.

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?