Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20060508

Docket: A-445-05

Citation: 2006 FCA 168

PRESENT:      LINDENJ.A.

                        NOËL J.A.

                        SHARLOW J.A.

BETWEEN:

PHASECOM SYSTEMS INC doing business as MASTEC CANADA

                                                                                                                                      Applicant      

and

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, Local 586

Respondent

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 8, 2006.

Order delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 8, 2006.

REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE COURT BY:                                                      SHARLOW J.A.


Date: 20060508

Docket: A-445-05

Citation: 2006 FCA 168

PRESENT:      LINDENJ.A.

                        NOËL J.A.

                        SHARLOW J.A.

BETWEEN:

PHASECOM SYSTEMS INC doing business as MASTEC CANADA

Applicant

and

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, Local 586

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on May 8, 2006)

SHARLOW J.A.

[1]                The applicant challenges, on jurisdictional grounds, the decision of the Canada Industrial Relations Board to certify as a bargaining unit the cable television and cable internet technicians employed by the applicant to install, upgrade or remove hardware which connects or disconnects residential users to cable television or internet service owned and operated by Rogers Communications Inc. At present, the applicant operates only in Ontario.

[2]                The jurisdictional question the applicant seeks to raise in this court was not put to the CIRB. However the applicant had argued before the Ontario Labour Relations Board that its activities brought it within federal labour jurisdiction. The Ontario Board agreed with that submission. The decision of the Ontario Board is apparently not the subject of any application for judicial review. The CIRB issued its decision after the Ontario decision, but gave no reasons and did not comment on the jurisdictional issue.

[3]                We appreciate that the jurisdictional issue the applicant seeks to raise is a question of law. However, it is not satisfactory to deal with that legal issue for the first time on judicial review without the benefit of the CIRB's analysis of the relevant jurisdictional facts and issues: Northern Telecom Ltd. v. Communications Workers of Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 115. Indeed, it is not clear from the record of this case that the CIRB had any evidence of the jurisdictional facts.

[4]                We are all of the view that this application should be dismissed with costs.

                                                                                                                    "K. Sharlow"

J.A.


                                            FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                      NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                    A-445-05

STYLE OF CAUSE:                    PHASECOM SYSTEMS INC.

                                                     doing business as MASTEC CANADA

                                                                       

                                                                                                          APPLICANT

                                                   - and -

                                                   INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF

                                                    ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL 586

  

                                                                                                        RESPONDENT

PLACE OF HEARING:              TORONTO, ONTARIO

DATE OF HEARING:                MAY 8, 2006

REASONS FOR ORDER:        SHARLOW J.A.

                                         

CONCURRED IN BY:               LINDEN J.A.

                                                NOËL J.A.

DATED:                                       MAY 8, 2006

APPEARANCES:

Ms. Patricia LeFebour                                                         FOR THE APPLICANT

Toronto, Ontario

Mr. Ronald Lebi                                                                  FOR THE RESPONDENT

Toronto, Ontario

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Roy Elliott

Kim O'Connor                                                                    FOR THE APPLICANT

Toronto, Ontario

Koskie Minsky                                                                    FOR THE RESPONDENT

Toronto, Ontario

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.