Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20031210

Docket: T-757-02

Citation: 2003 FC 1444

BETWEEN:

                                                         

                               ALWAYS TRAVEL INC. and

                   HIGHBOURNE ENTERPRISES INC. and

CANADIAN STANDARD TRAVEL AGENT REGISTRY (CSTAR)

                                                                                                    Plaintiffs

                                                    - and -

             AIR CANADA, AMERICAN AIRLINES INC.,

         UNITED AIRLINES INC., DELTA AIRLINES INC.,

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES INC., NORTHWEST AIRLINES INC.,

and INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (IATA)

                                                                                                Defendants

                                  REASONS FOR ORDER

             (Delivered from the Bench in Montréal, Quebec

                                     on December 10, 2003)

                                                         

HUGESSEN J.

[1]    On May 30, 2003, in issuing a stay of these proceedings, I indicated that I was acting in comity with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. I also indicated that, in my view, the latter Court was the proper Court to deal with the extent and timing of a stay in the context of the CCAA proceedings.


[2]    Since that time, Farley J. has lifted the stay with regard to Air Canada and United Airlines for the limited purpose of requiring the latter to produce affidavits in response to the plaintiffs' certification motion, but no more. That has now been done.

[3]    In my view, Farley J. is still the proper person to decide whether allowing the present class action certification proceedings to continue beyond the present stage would be detrimental to, or might hinder the proper administration of the CCAA proceedings. This is not a matter of the paramountcy of one statute or one Court over another, but simply a practical question of which Court is best situated to deal with each question as and when that question arises. We may be very close to the point where the proper answer to that is this Court, but I remain firmly of the view that the question must first be asked and answered in the Ontario Court which has a far broader perspective of the total situation than do I.

[4]    Accordingly, these proceedings as against Air Canada and United Airlines are stayed until further order.

                                                                          "James K. Hugessen"                 

                                                                                                           Judge                              

Montréal, Quebec

December 10, 2003


                                       FEDERAL COURT

                                                         

    NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET.:                                              T-757-02

STYLE OF CAUSE:                               ALWAYS TRAVEL INC. ET AL

v. AIR CANADA ET AL.

DATE OF HEARING:              December 10, 2003

PLACE OF HEARING:                         Montréal, Quebec

REASONS FOR ORDER:                     THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE HUGESSEN

DATED:                                                   December 10, 2003                               

APPEARANCES:

Mr. James Poyner, Mr. Ken Baxter,

Mr. Gilles Gareau and Mr. John Legge              FOR PLAINTIFFS

Ms. Katherine Kay                                                          FOR DEFENDANT

Air Canada

Mr. Louis Brousseau,                                        FOR DEFENDANT

Mr. Tom Heintzman, Mr.Frédéric Pérodeau                    American Airlines

Mr. Michael Penny                                                            FOR DEFENDANT

United Airlines Inc.

Mr. Kent E. Thomson                                           FOR DEFENDANT

Delta Airlines Inc.

Ms. Martha Healey                                                            FOR DEFENDANT

Continental Airlines Inc.


Mr. David W. Kent                                                           FOR DEFENDANT

Northwest Airlines Inc.

Mr. Stanley Wong                                                             FOR DEFENDANT    International Air Transport Association

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Poyner Baxter

North Vancouver, B.C.                                                    FOR PLAINTIFFS

Lauzon Bélanger                                                               

Montréal, Quebec                                                             FOR PLAINTIFFS

Legge & Legge

Toronto, Ontario                                                               FOR PLAINTIFFS

Stikeman Elliott                                                     FOR DEFENDANT

Toronto, Ontario                                                               Air Canada

McCarthy Tétrault                                                             FOR DEFENDANT

Montréal, Quebec                                                             American Airlines Inc.

Torys                                                                                  FOR DEFENDANT

Toronto, Ontario                                                               United Airlines Inc.

Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg                                     FOR DEFENDANT

Toronto, Ontario                                                               Delta Airlines Inc.

Ogilvy Renault                                                     FOR DEFENDANT

Ottawa, Ontario                                                                Continental Airlines Inc.

McMillan Binch                                                                 FOR DEFENDANT

Toronto, Ontario                                                               Northwest Airlines Inc.

Davis & Company                                                             FOR DEFENDANT     International

Toronto, Ontario                                                               Air Transport Association


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.