Search by
Appeal concerned the judicial review of a removal decision by the Piikani Nation Removal Appeals Board.
Central claim was that the Board’s decision lacked procedural fairness and was unreasonable.
Respondent had been the subject of a removal petition as a Piikani Nation councillor.
Subsequent election occurred, and respondent did not seek re-election, rendering the appeal moot.
Appellants requested the Court still rule on the merits despite mootness, relying on discretion.
The Court declined to exercise discretion and dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal without costs.
Facts and outcome of the case
The case involved Erwin Bastien and the Chief and Council of Piikani Nation, who appealed a decision of the Federal Court that had dismissed their application for judicial review. The review challenged a July 7, 2021, decision by the Piikani Nation Removal Appeals Board, which had dismissed their petition to remove Brian Jackson from his role as a councillor of the Piikani Nation. The appellants claimed the process before the Board lacked procedural fairness and that the resulting decision was unreasonable.
Following the Federal Court ruling in April 2022, an election took place. Brian Jackson did not run in that election, and as a result, the appellants acknowledged that the appeal had become moot. Despite that, they argued that the Federal Court of Appeal should still rule on the merits of the case by exercising its discretion to address moot matters.
The Federal Court of Appeal, led by Justice Roussel, declined to exercise that discretion. The Court applied the principles from Borowski v. Canada (Attorney General) and noted the absence of a memorandum of fact and law from the respondent as a relevant factor. As a result, the appeal was dismissed as moot. Additionally, the respondent's cross-appeal was found to be procedurally improper and was also dismissed.
No costs were awarded to either party in relation to the appeal or the cross-appeal.
Download documents
Appellant
Respondent
Court
Federal Court of AppealCase Number
A-115-22Practice Area
Administrative lawAmount
Not specified/UnspecifiedWinner
RespondentTrial Start Date
24 May 2022