|
Charter - s.24(1) Remedies (4). Fatema v. Higa
In Fatema v. Higa (Fed CA, 2026) the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal, that brought against a dismissal of a Federal Court appeal, that brought against an Associate Judge order which "struck out the appellant’s statement of claim without leave to amend because it was "“plain and obvious”" that the Federal Court lacked jurisdiction, the claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and the claim constituted an abuse of process".
Here the court considers the Federal Court's jurisdiction, and whether the Charter extends jurisdiction:[5] The Federal Court lacks jurisdiction over the appellant’s proposed action. The Federal Court’s jurisdiction is limited to what is assigned to it by federal statutes: Canada (Prime Minister) v. Hameed, 2025 FCA 118 at paras. 25–27, citing ITO-Int’l Terminal Operators v. Miida Electronics, 1986 CanLII 91 (SCC), [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752 at p. 766 (S.C.C.). In Crowe, this Court held that no statute grants the Federal Court jurisdiction over claims based on the alleged misconduct of federally appointed judges (at para. 18; see also Feeney v. Canada, 2022 FCA 190 at paras. 10–13). Also true, but even more evident, is that the Federal Court does not have jurisdiction over the appellant’s claims against the respondent, a provincially appointed judge.
[6] Nor does the Charter empower the Federal Court to grant the relief sought by the appellant. By itself, the Charter does not grant jurisdiction to the Federal Court: Windsor (City) v. Canadian Transit Co., 2016 SCC 54 at paras. 59–65. Rather, the Federal Court may only award remedies under the Charter where it has jurisdiction over the underlying claim: Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FCA 136 at para. 11, citing Mahabir v. Canada (Minister of Employment & Immigration), [1992] F.C. 133 at p. 138 (F.C.A.); see also R. v. 974649 Ontario Inc., 2001 SCC 81 at para. 15, citing Mills v. The Queen, 1986 CanLII 17 (SCC), [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863 at p. 890 (per Lamer J., dissenting, but not on this point) (S.C.C.). Lacking jurisdiction over the wrongs alleged by the appellant, the Federal Court could not order Charter damages or other remedies.
|