Focus On

POLITICAL PARTIES - Appeals and judicial review - Parties - Standing

Monday, June 04, 2018 @ 8:49 AM  

Lexis Advance® Quicklaw®
Motion the Conservative Party of Canada (“CPC”) to quash Trost’s application for judicial review. Trost was a candidate in the 2017 leadership contest of the CPC. Trost sought judicial review of the CPC’s decision that found his campaign liable for allegedly misusing a list of 250,000 CPC members and fined him $50,000. Trost denied his campaign was responsible for the leak of the membership list. The CPC did not provide any reasons for their determination that Trost’s campaign was responsible for the leak or why the Leadership Organizing Committee had made the decision instead of the Chief Returning Officer.

HELD: Motion dismissed. The issue of whether the Divisional Court lacked jurisdiction because of the absence of state conduct was referred to the panel scheduled to hear the judicial review application. The case law on the issue appeared to be in conflict. Given the fundamentally policy-oriented nature of the decision, it would better serve the interests of the parties and the development of the case law as a whole to have the issue determined by a full panel of the Divisional Court. The CPC, as an unincorporated association, had standing to be subject to judicial review, assuming the subject matter of the application was appropriate for judicial review. It was not plain and obvious that the application for judicial review would fail for prematurity.

Trost v. Conservative Party of Canada, [2018] O.J. No. 2022, Ontario Superior Court of Justice - Divisional Court, M. Koehnen J., April 9, 2018. Digest No. TLD-June42018003