Weatherill v. Canada ( Attorney General )
T-18-98
Joyal J.
23/1/98
13 pp.
Application for injunction staying proceedings currently under way pending hearing and judicial determination of main issue, application for order declaring Governor in Council could not proceed to remove applicant from office without complying with Judges Act, s. 69-Applicant, chairperson of Canada Labour Relations Board (CLRB) appointed by Governor in Council in May 1989 for term of 10 years, to hold office during good behaviour (removable for cause only)-After newspaper and auditor general pointed out his excessive travel and hospitality expenses, Minister of Labour announced in House intended to fire applicant and that legal steps in order for Governor in Council to remove applicant had been initiated-In view of nature of his functions, very close to judicial, applicant argues process of inquiry by Canadian Judicial Council under Judges Act, s. 69 only one capable of ensuring complete, fair and impartial hearing-Applicant also arguing harm to himself and to institution of which chairperson would be serious and irreparable and that delay in final disposition will not be to respondents' prejudice-Application dismissed-Little case law on such cases-In effect, "behaviour" on part of order in council appointments determinable on case-by-case basis; Crown, through Governor in Council, preserving for itself ultimate judicial prerogative to determine when "behaviour" compatible or not with particular office-Judicial intrusion in field of ultimate prerogative authority very delicate matter-Although applicant's case has sufficient merit to pass first stage (arguable case) of three-fold test applicable in stay proceedings, applicant failed to establish irreparable harm-Outcome of case cannot be prejudged-Furthermore, when respondent representing public authority, one must look at balance of convenience more widely and take into account interests of public in general, to whom these duties owed-Judges Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. J-1, s. 69 (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 51, s. 28; 1993, c. 34, s. 89).