Date: 20030514
Docket: A-465-02
Citation: 2003 FCA 223
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
BETWEEN:
JEAN-PIERRE GALIPEAU
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA and
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CANADA
Respondents
Hearing held at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 13, 2003.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 14, 2003.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: DÉCARY J.A.
NADON J.A.
Date: 20030514
Docket: A-465-02
Citation: 2003 FCA 223
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
BETWEEN:
JEAN-PIERRE GALIPEAU
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA and
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CANADA
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
[1] This is an appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice Lemieux of the Trial Division granting a motion to strike out the appellant's application for judicial review.
[2] In my view, the appeal should be dismissed for the following reasons.
[3] The Trial Division judge properly concluded that section 41 of the Privacy Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-21 (the Act) does not apply in this case. Section 41 provides that any individual who has been refused access to personal information requested under subsection 12(1) of the Act may apply to the Federal Court for a review of the matter. The appellant had access to all the documents in his file and accordingly there was no denial of access, either real or presumed.
[4] The appellant is also asking the Court to order that a forged document printed on microfiche dealing with the issuance of a social insurance number be destroyed. To the extent that this document is a forgery and constitutes evidence of making and uttering a forged document, as the appellant alleges, I do not see how and more particularly why this Court could or should order that incriminating evidence be destroyed. In two letters addressed to the appellant and dated, respectively, February 7 and April 20, 2001, Human Resources Development Canada informed the appellant that the social insurance number in dispute had been voided and that the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, Canada Pension Plan and the Régie des rentes du Québec had been notified of this and of the new social insurance number assigned to the appellant.
[5] In any event, the power to intervene that is given to the Court in section 48 of the Act is in sequence with the remedy provided in section 41. It is limited to ordering disclosure of information that has been requested. It does not extend to destroying such information.
[6] I would dismiss the appeal with costs.
"Gilles Létourneau"
J.A.
"I concur.
Robert Décary J.A."
"I concur.
M. Nadon J.A."
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LLB
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-465-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: JEAN-PIERRE GALIPEAU v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA and HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING: OTTAWA
DATE OF HEARING: May 13, 2003
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: DÉCARY J.A.
NADON J.A.
DATED: May 14, 2003
APPEARANCES:
Jean-Pierre Galipeau APPELLANT
Louis-Alexandre Guay FOR THE RESPONDENTS
Virginie Cantave
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENTS
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Date: 20030514
Docket: A-465-02
Ottawa, Ontario, May 14, 2003
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
JEAN-PIERRE GALIPEAU
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA and
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT CANADA
Respondents
JUDGMENT
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
"Robert Décary"
J.A.
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LLB