Madelaine Mackenzie

The applicant challenged the constitutionality of residency requirements for election officers under the federal Elections Act, arguing they infringed his s. 7 Charter liberty interest by impacting his choice of residence and employment.

The court dismissed the application, finding that choice of residence does not rise to the profound level of personal decisions protected by the s. 7 liberty interest, which is intended for profoundly intimate and personal choices, not economic interests.

The applicant, who successfully challenged a First Nation's decision to postpone its election and the validity of federal regulations allowing such postponement, sought costs from the First Nation and the Attorney General on a solicitor-client basis or an elevated scale.

The respondents argued for no costs due to divided success or requested that only the Attorney General bear the costs.

The Federal Court rejected the arguments for divided success and solicitor-client costs but awarded elevated costs in a lump sum, finding the challenge to the regulations raised important issues of public interest affecting First Nations nationwide.

The Court ordered the Attorney General to pay $20,000 and the First Nation to pay $10,000 to the applicant, and dismissed the First Nation's claim for costs against the Attorney General.

The applicant, a member of the Acho Dene Koe First Nation, sought judicial review of the band council's decision to postpone its election and extend its term of office, and challenged the validity of section 4 of the federal First Nations Election Cancellation and Postponement Regulations (Prevention of Diseases).

The Federal Court held that the band council did not have the customary power to extend its own term.

The Court further declared that section 4 of the Regulations was ultra vires the regulation-making power in section 73(1)(f) of the Indian Act, finding that the power to regulate disease prevention on reserves did not extend to regulating the basic parameters of democratic governance such as the length of elected officials' terms.

The declaration of invalidity was suspended for 60 days.

The applicant sought an interlocutory injunction to be added to the ballot for the upcoming election for chief of the respondent First Nation after the returning officer declared him ineligible due to an outstanding debt.

The Federal Court dismissed the motion for interim relief.

Applying the RJR-MacDonald test, the Court found that while the applicant raised serious issues regarding the validity of the debt and the election code, he did not demonstrate a strong likelihood of prevailing based on the incomplete evidentiary record.

Furthermore, the applicant failed to show irreparable harm because adequate alternative remedies were available, including appealing the election results through the First Nation's internal appeal process or challenging them directly in Court after the election.