ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BEFORE: Then, Carnwath and Swinton JJ.
B E T W E E N:
Canadian Health Care Workers
Applicant
- and -
National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Ontario Labour Relations Board, Central Park Lodges Ltd., Kanata Retirement Residence, Retirement Residences Operations (REIT) LP, Central Health Services, Central Health Services C.O.B. as Colonel By Retirement CPL Inc.
Respondents
COUNSEL:
Kelvin Kucey, for the Applicant
Anthony F. Dale, for the Respondent CAW-Canada
Leonard Marvy, for the Respondent, Ontario Labour Relations Board
HEARD: March 2, 2004
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CARNWATH J.: (Orally)
1All parties concede the standard of review is patent unreasonableness. However, the applicant submits the Board’s decision was without jurisdiction when it dealt with the issue raised by s.53.
2The applicant submits that the Board’s decision under s.53 required the Board to declare the Collective Agreement invalid for all purposes, not just for the two applications for certification of the two work sites before the Board. We disagree with that submission.
3In fashioning the remedy, the Board was entitled to restrict the provisions of s.53 to those applications before the Board. We find the Board‘s expertise was engaged in fashioning its remedy. In the words of Cory J. in Royal Oak Mines v. Canada (Labour Relations Board), 1996 220 (SCC), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 369.
“No other body will have the requisite skill and experience in labour relations to construct a fair and workable solution which will enable the parties to arrive at a final resolution of their dispute.”
4We find the Board’s remedy was entirely within its jurisdiction.
5The other matters raised by the applicant take issue with alleged inconsistencies in the Board’s reasons and the Board’s failure to properly consider matters before it.
6We find no merit in these submissions. Nothing in the alleged deficiencies approach patent unreasonableness. We find no lack of an evidentiary basis for the Board’s conclusions.
THEN J.
7We endorse the application record as follows: “This application is dismissed for oral reasons of the Court delivered by Carnwath J. Costs to the Respondents CAW-Canada, fixed in the amount of $4,000. We wish to make it clear that the costs award reflects our view that $4,000 is a reasonable amount which does not reflect a punitive element for the filing of the affidavit of Mr. Daignault. The Labour Board seeks no costs and none are awarded.”
THEN J.
CARNWATH J.
SWINTON J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: March 2, 2004
Date of Release: March 8, 2004
COURT FILE NO.: 646/02
DATE: 20040302
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BEFORE: Then, Carnwath and Swinton JJ.
B E T W E E N:
Canadian Health Care Workers
Applicant
- and -
National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), Ontario Labour Relations Board, Central Park Lodges Ltd., Kanata Retirement Residence, Retirement Residences Operations (REIT) LP, Central Health Services, Central Health Services C.O.B. as Colonel By Retirement CPL Inc.
Respondents
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CARNWATH J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: March 2, 2004
Date of Release: March 8, 2004