Federal Court hears challenge to Transport Minister’s travel restriction based on vaccine status

Wilson Law Office, Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms represented parties

Federal Court hears challenge to Transport Minister’s travel restriction based on vaccine status

The Minister of Transport’s decision to restrict mobility rights based on COVID-19 vaccination status was challenged in the Federal Court with Wilson Law Office, Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, Allison Kindle Pejovic, and Eva Chipiuk appearing on behalf of the parties. The Federal Court also heard an action contesting the denial made by the Correctional Service of Canada of continued access to private family visits in some correctional facilities.

Federal Court

The last surviving First Minister who drafted the Constitution Act 1982, Brian Peckford, and several other applicants filed an application for judicial review to challenge the decision of the Minister of Transport to restrict the mobility rights of Canadians based on their COVID-19 vaccination status. The decision, according to the application, effectively banned Canadians who chose not to receive an experimental medical treatment from domestic and international air travel, which grossly violatedtheir constitutionally protected rights as Canadians. Wilson Law Office and Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms acted as legal counsel on behalf of the applicants.

The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) denied spouses Joshua Barriera and Jennifer Dagenias continued access to private family visits at Donnacona Institution in Donnacona, Que., or institutions operated by CSC. The spouses claimed that employees of CSC had unlawfully denied the application for private family visits, based on false information and improper determination of the risks involved in permitting the visits. J. Todd Sloan represented the couple, Barriera and Dagenias. 

David Meeches, a candidate for Chief of Long Plain First Nation in Manitoba, sought for an order from the court, setting aside the result of the indigenous community’s April 15, 2022, general election where Kyra Wilson was declared Chief. Meeches claimed that the committee breached several provisions of the Election Act. Tapper Cuddy LLP represented Meeches in the Federal Court.

Blaney McMurtry LLP acted for Wheel Monitor Inc. in a patent infringement claim against Cleral Inc., which was represented by Miller Thomson LLP.

Bayer Inc. brought a claim under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations against Viatris Canada. McCarthy Terault LLP represented Bayer Inc., while Osler Hoskin & Harcourt acted for Viatris Canada.

In the area of immigration and refugee law, the law firms present in court include Lewis and Associates, Long Mangalji LLP, Mamann Sandaluk and Kingwell LLP, Pax Law Corporation, Edelmann and Company, Gindin Wolson Simmonds, Topmarke Attorneys LLP, and Grice and Associates.

Federal Court of Appeal

Harold Peach contested the decision of the Tax Court of Canada stating that the Minister reassessed his 2011 income tax returns “beyond the normal period,” and not within the three-year period required by the Income Tax Act. He also argued that the Tax Court incorrectly ruled that his rental properties were not sources of income, and consequently disallowed all expenses associated with the rental properties. He also asserted that the explanations offered by the Minister should not have been accepted by the Tax Court. Peach was self-represented before the Federal Court of Appeal, while Cynthia Isenor and Payton Tench from the Department of Justice represented the Crown.


Recent articles & video

SCC confirms manslaughter convictions in case about proper jury instructions on causation

Law firm associate attrition continues to decline, NALP Foundation study shows

How systemizing law firm work allocation enhances diversity efforts and overcomes affinity bias

Dentons advises Saturn on $600 million acquisition of Saskatchewan oil assets

Ontario Court of Appeal upholds anesthesiologist’s liability in severe birth complications case

BC Supreme Court assigns liability in rear-end vehicle collision at Surrey intersection

Most Read Articles

BC Supreme Court rules for equal asset division in Port Alberni property dispute

BC Supreme Court rules vehicle owner and driver liable for 2011 Chilliwack collision

BC Supreme Court upholds solicitor-client privilege in medical negligence case

Petition to remove estate executor does not amount to ‘reprehensible conduct:’ BC Supreme Court