Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Canada v. Khadr

Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date 2011-03-09
Neutral citation 2011 FCA 92
File numbers A-260-10

Decision Content

Federal Court of Appeal

CANADA

Cour d'appel fédérale

 

 

Date: 20110309

Docket: A-260-10

Citation: 2011 FCA 92

 

CORAM:       NOËL J.A.

                        PELLETIER J.A.

                        TRUDEL J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA,

THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, and

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE

Appellants

and

OMAR AHMED KHADR

Respondent

 

AND BETWEEN:

THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA and

THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Appellants

and

OMAR AHMED KHADR

Respondent

 

Heard at Edmonton, Alberta, on March 9, 2011.

Judgment delivered from the Bench at Edmonton, Alberta, on March 9, 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                                      NOËL J.A.

 

Federal Court of Appeal

CANADA

Cour d'appel fédérale

 

 

Date: 20110309

Docket: A-260-10

Citation: 2011 FCA 92

 

CORAM:       NOËL J.A.

                        PELLETIER J.A.

                        TRUDEL J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA,

THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, and

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE

Appellants

and

OMAR AHMED KHADR

Respondent

 

 

 

AND BETWEEN:

THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA and

THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Appellants

and

OMAR AHMED KHADR

Respondent

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Edmonton, Alberta, on March 9, 2011)

NOËL J.A.

 

[1]               As a result of the prison sentence imposed on the respondent following the guilty plea which he registered before the U.S. Military Commission, he is no longer detained by reason of the breach of his Charter rights which forms the basis of the judgment under appeal (see Canada (Prime Minister) v. Khadr, 2010 SCC 3 [Khadr II] at paragraph 48). It follows that, except for the award of costs, the judgement rendered by Zinn J. is no longer operative, and the appeal is moot.

 

[2]               The appellants are not asking us to hear the appeal for the sole purpose of reviewing the award of costs, and even if they did, we do not believe that our discretion should be exercised to decide what are now academic propositions of law for this limited purpose.

 

[3]               The appeal will be dismissed for mootness, the parties assuming their respective costs.

 

 

“Marc Noël”

J.A.

 

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

DOCKET:                                                                              A-260-10

 

(APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RUSSEL W. ZINN DATED JULY 5, 2010, DOCKET NOS. T-230-10 AND T-231-10)

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                  THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA ET AL v. OMAR AHMED KHADR

 

                                                                                    AND BETWEEN:

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                  THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA ET AL v. OMAR AHMED KHADR

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                                            Edmonton, Alberta

 

 

DATE OF HEARING:                                              March 9, 2011

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:       (NOËL, PELLETIER & TRUDEL JJ.A.)

 

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                            NOËL J.A.

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Simon Fothergill

FOR THE APPELLANTS

 

Nathan J. Whitling

Dennis Edney

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Myles J. Kirvan

Deputy Attorney General for Canada

 

FOR THE APPELLANTS

 

Parlee McLaws LLP

Barristers and Solicitors

Edmonton, Alberta

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 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.