The Federal Court of Appeal rejected multiple appeals this year in relation to various OLA claims
In its latest ruling on a series of claims by a man alleging various violations of the Official Languages Act, the Federal Court of Appeal has rejected the man’s argument that the Crown and the Speaker of the Senate should be parties in his action.
The man, Michael Moreau, first filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Official Languages in June 2024, arguing that the language rights of members of Parliament were violated during question period in the House of Commons the previous day. During the proceedings, acoustic feedback had interrupted simultaneous interpretation efforts, which the Speaker of the House of Commons commented on in English.
Moreau argued that the feedback had interrupted MPs’ access to translation services, violating the OLA, which confers equal weight to English and French in the federal government.
When the commissioner rejected Moreau’s complaint, he challenged the commissioner’s decision in court. In his application, he identified the respondent as “One Parliament for Canada (As represented by the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Speaker of the Senate and His Majesty the King),” a phrase derived from the Constitution Act, 1867. The Constitution Act defines the Parliament of Canada as consisting of the king, the Senate, and the House of Commons.
The Speaker of the Senate and the Crown brought motions to the court asking to be removed from the case as respondents because they were not involved in the allegations. In two separate orders, the federal court granted their requests, noting that the allegations and remedies sought by Moreau did not concern them. Moreau appealed the orders.
In a decision on Tuesday, the FCA upheld the lower court orders, calling the lower court’s findings “unassailable.” Moreau’s allegations refer to the interruption of simultaneous translation services during a House of Commons debate, the court noted, yet “neither His Majesty the King nor the Speaker of the Senate plays a role in the conduct of House of Commons proceedings, nor in the way in which the simultaneous interpretation of those proceedings is provided.
“The House of Commons was present in this matter and clearly has better knowledge of the facts in dispute.” The FCA added that the same could be said for the remedies sought.
The appellate court also agreed with the lower courts that “no Act of Parliament provides for naming the Speaker as a respondent in this proceeding.
“Even assuming that the OLA or the [Federal Courts Rules] allow the Speaker to be named as a party, doing so would not be appropriate insofar as this application involves only the House of Commons,” the FCA added.
The FCA concluded that while Moreau displayed “obvious good faith, the issues he is asking the court to decide are neither new nor of general interest, and they are based on a legal argument that is tenuous, to say the least.”
The appellate court’s order is the latest in a series of rulings on cases involving Moreau.
In July, a different FCA panel dismissed another appeal by Moreau. That dispute also began in June 2024 when he was on vacation and saw a federal sign that was damaged so that information was not displayed in both English and French. Moreau filed a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, alleging a violation of the Official Languages Act, but the commissioner rejected the complaint, stating that the damaged sign was a maintenance issue rather than a violation of the law.
Moreau then filed an application against the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada in federal court, alleging the department had violated the OLA. Under the Federal Courts Rules, his notice of application had to be served on the commissioner. Moreau asked legal counsel at the commissioner’s office to return an acknowledgement of receipt card attached to his email.
When he did not receive a signed acknowledgement of the receipt card, Moreau filed a complaint against the commissioner with the Office of the Commissioner. After an investigation, the office rejected his complaint, prompting Moreau to file another complaint in federal court, which the court dismissed.
The FCA agreed that Moreau’s application had “no reasonable prospect of success and therefore should be quashed.”
In September and June, the FCA dismissed two other appeals Moreau brought concerning the OLA.
Moreau, who represented himself in each case, could not be reached for comment.
Representatives for the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for the Department of Justice said, "The Government of Canada is reviewing the decision to determine its impact and the appropriate next steps."
Editor's Note: This story has been updated with a comment from the Department of Justice.
