[2012] 1 F.C.R. D-7
Transportation
Appeal from Canadian Transportation Agency’s determination it could adjudicate complaint concerning noise, vibration arising from railway operations at New Westminster Rail Yard notwithstanding existence of settlement agreement between parties regarding same complaint—Quayside Community Board filing complaint with Agency in accordance with Canada Transportation Act, S.C. 1996, c. 10, s. 95.1—Parties referring complaint to mediation, reaching settlement agreement—However, Community Board later filing second complaint—Whether settlement agreement precluding Community Board from relitigating complaint previously compromised—Pursuant to Act, Agency’s Guidelines for the Resolution of Complaints Concerning Railway Noise and Vibration, complaint may only be investigated if Agency satisfied collaborative measures in Guidelines exhausted—Agency must respect terms of any final settlement agreement concluded by parties to complaint before Agency—Read as whole, Act’s provisions regarding publication of guidelines on collaborative resolution of noise, vibration complaints reflecting intent that collaborative, adjudicative procedures constituting alternate mechanisms for reaching final resolution of complaint—Legislative scheme not supporting conclusion that complaint’s successful resolution through collaborative measures not replacing adjudicative process with respect to those issues parties finally resolving—Agency failing to consider, decide central issue raised by parties regarding effect settlement agreement having—Agency’s failure rendering decision unreasonable—Appeal allowed.
Bnsf Railway Company v. Canada (Transportation Agency) (A-25-11, 2011 FCA 269, Dawson J.A., judgment dated September 28, 2011, 13 pp.)