E-13-(i)Book of Authorities
14 passages
oceeds of sale — Al‑ berta Energy and Utilities Board Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. A‑17, s. 15(3) — Public Utilities Board Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. P‑45, s. 37 — Gas Utilities Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. G‑5, s. 26(2). ATCO is a public utility in Alberta whi...
AI summary ATCO, an Alberta natural gas utility, applied to sell unused Calgary assets under the Gas Utilities Act, arguing the sale would not harm customers. Proceeds would retire asset book value, cover costs, and distribute profits to shareholders. The City of Calgary opposed shareholder distribution, prioritizing ratepayer interests. The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and Public Utilities Board Act are cited in the proceeding.
on) v. Vavilov 2019 SCC 65 File No.: 37748. 2018: December 4, 5, 6; 2019: December 19. Present: Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL Administrat...
AI summary The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) case 2019 SCC 65 examines whether the Registrar of Citizenship's decision to cancel a Canadian-born individual's citizenship certificate, due to his parents being Russian spies, was reasonable under the Citizenship Act. The case involves interpreting statutory exceptions to Canadian citizenship rules and the reasonableness of administrative decisions.
ctful consideration of the earlier decision, and after giving due weight to all the circumstances, that a Justice may give effect to his own opinions in preference to an earlier decision of the Court. [20] Nonetheless, this Court has in th...
AI summary The text discusses the reconsideration of legal precedents when they are deemed unsound, unworkable, or criticized, citing cases like Craig , Henry , and Bernard . It emphasizes that adhering to prior decisions can perpetuate legal uncertainty, particularly in complex frameworks affecting standard of review analysis and access to justice.
V. Mr. Vavilov's Application for Judicial Review [146] The case at bar involves an application for judicial review of a decision made by the Canadian Registrar of Citizenship on August 15, 2014. The Registrar's decision concerned Mr. Vavil...
AI summary Mr. Vavilov's judicial review challenges the Canadian Registrar of Citizenship's decision to revoke his citizenship under s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act and s. 26(3) of the Citizenship Regulations. The court found the Registrar's decision unreasonable, upheld the Federal Court of Appeal's quashing of the decision, and declined to remit the matter for redetermination.
of the Russian state, and were returned to Russia in a "spy swap" the following day. Mr. Vavilov has described the revelation as a traumatic event characterized by disbelief and a crisis of identity. [150] Just prior to his parents' deport...
AI summary Mr. Vavilov faced challenges obtaining a Canadian passport after his parents' deportation. He submitted DNA testing, changed his surname, and applied for a certificate of Canadian citizenship. Passport applications were denied initially, but he eventually obtained the certificate in 2013, leading to a mandamus process settled out of court, with the Minister agreeing to issue a travel document by July 2013.
(1) Registrar's Decision - [152] In a brief letter sent to Mr. Vavilov on August 15, 2014, the Registrar informed him that she was cancelling his certificate of citizenship pursuant to s. 26(3) of the Citizenship Regulations on the basis t...
AI summary The Registrar cancelled Mr. Vavilov's citizenship certificate, citing his parents' employment with a foreign government and their convictions under U.S. law, invoking sections of the Citizenship Act and Regulations to deny his eligibility for citizenship by birth.
ot apply to him. The cancellation of his citizenship certificate on the basis of s. 3(2)(a) therefore could not stand, and Mr. Vavilov was entitled to Canadian citizenship under the Citizenship Act . [168] The dissenting judge disagreed, f...
AI summary The majority held that canceling Mr. Vavilov's citizenship under s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act was invalid, while the dissenting judge found the Registrar's interpretation reasonable, allowing for two interpretations of the provision. The dissenting view supported upholding the Registrar's decision regarding Mr. Vavilov's parents' eligibility.
acquire the nationality of that State'. Some states extend the rule to the children of consuls, and there is some support for this from expert opinion. [Emphasis deleted.] (Brownlie, at pp. 392-93). [180] Mr. Vavilov included relevant exce...
AI summary The text examines section 3(2) of Canada's Citizenship Act, arguing it aligns with international law by excluding children of diplomats from automatic citizenship. Parliamentary debates from 1976 are cited, emphasizing the intent to conform to international norms while avoiding unintended effects on other groups. The analysis critiques an analyst's failure to address legislative history contradicting her conclusions about the provision's scope.
rform duties in the service of Lebanon in order for his children to fall within the meaning of s. 3(2)(a), and concluded that "what Mr. Hitti did when he was in the country is not relevant": para. 32. [188] What can be seen from both Lee a...
AI summary The analysis examines cases ( Lee , Hitti , Al-Ghamdi ) to interpret Section 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act, emphasizing that diplomatic status—not functional duties in foreign service—determines eligibility. The analyst is criticized for omitting the Federal Court's reasoning in Al-Ghamdi when assessing espionage activities' relevance to the provision.
t did not intend s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act to apply to children of individuals who have not been granted diplomatic privileges and immunities. That being said, we would stress that it is not our intention to offer a definitive inte...
AI summary The court concludes that s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act does not apply to children of non-diplomatically privileged individuals, dismissing the appeal with costs to Mr. Vavilov, who is a Canadian citizen under s. 3(1)(a). The Registrar's interpretation was deemed unreasonable.
y for its development, including administrative decision-makers. Dunsmuir embraced this more inclusive view of the rule of law by acknowledging that the "court-centric conception of the rule of law" had to be "reined in by acknowledging th...
AI summary The text discusses the rule of law in administrative decision-making, emphasizing that courts do not have exclusive authority over legal questions. It references Dunsmuir and Hryniak , highlighting the importance of fair dispute resolution and access to justice for all litigants, particularly vulnerable groups. Legal scholars and judges, including McLachlin and Morissette J.A., are cited to support the legislative intent behind administrative law frameworks.
troduce incremental changes to our judicial review framework, while respecting its underlying principles and placing the ball in the legislatures' court to modify the standards of review if they wish. [283] To the extent that concerns were...
AI summary The text discusses maintaining judicial review principles while addressing concerns about administrative decision-making quality. It argues against judicial overreach via de novo reviews, emphasizing training for administrative actors instead. It warns against a checklist approach to reasonableness review, citing risks of excessive judicial scrutiny and delays.
Application to Mr. Vavilov [314] Alexander Vavilov challenges the Registrar of Citizenship's decision to cancel his citizenship certificate. The Registrar concluded that Mr. Vavilov was not a Canadian citizen, and therefore not entitled to...
AI summary Alexander Vavilov challenges the Registrar of Citizenship's decision to cancel his certificate, arguing he qualifies as a Canadian citizen despite his parents being foreign government representatives in Canada under s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-29.
Not applicable to children of foreign diplomats, etc. - (2) Paragraph (1)(a) does not apply to a person if, at the time of his birth, neither of his parents was a citizen or lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence and either of...
AI summary Section 3(2) of the Act excludes children of foreign diplomats from Canadian citizenship. The Registrar's decision denying Mr. Vavilov citizenship relied on an analyst's report, which argued his parents qualified under s. 3(2)(a) as foreign government representatives. The analysis compares current and historical statutory language to determine if the exception applies.