Action challenging vaccine policy struck due to explicit ouster of jurisdiction by FPSLRA grievance process.
The defendant moved to strike an action brought by federal public servants challenging the mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, arguing the action was barred by section 236 of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act (FPSLRA).
The Court found it plain and obvious that the plaintiffs had access to the grievance process under the FPSLRA and that this process ousted the Court's jurisdiction.
The motion to strike was granted and the action was dismissed.
Motion to strike judicial review of suspended Covid-19 vaccination mandate granted for mootness and prematurity.
The respondent moved to strike the applicants' judicial review application concerning the federal public service Covid-19 vaccination mandate on the grounds of mootness and prematurity.
The Federal Court granted the motion, finding that the suspension of the policy eliminated any live controversy, rendering the matter moot.
Furthermore, the Court held that the application was premature because the applicants had an adequate alternative remedy through the individual grievance process under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act.
Motion to strike judicial review granted due to failure to exhaust public sector grievance process.
The applicants, federal public servants placed on leave without pay for non-compliance with the COVID-19 vaccination policy, brought an application for judicial review challenging the policy.
The Attorney General moved to strike the application as premature.
The Federal Court granted the motion, holding that the applicants had an adequate and effective alternative remedy through the grievance process under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act.
The Court found no exceptional circumstances justifying bypass of the administrative process, and struck the application for judicial review.
