Judicial reviews and appeals
Judicial or panel reviews of Tribunal decisions
Any person affected by Tribunal findings or orders issued under the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) can apply for judicial review by the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) on grounds of, for instance, denial of natural justice or error of law. Any person affected by Tribunal procurement findings and recommendations under the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act can similarly request judicial review by the FCA under sections 18.1 and 28 of the Federal Courts Act. Lastly, Tribunal orders and decisions made pursuant to the Customs Act can be appealed under that act to the FCA or, under the Excise Tax Act, to the Federal Court.
This year again, a small proportion (7 out of 98 or 7%) of the Tribunal decisions were appealed to a reviewing court.
| Active at beginning of 2023-24 | Filed during 2023-24 | Disposed during 2023-24 | Outstanding at the end of 2023-24 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Withdrawn | Allowed | Dismissed | ||||
| SIMA | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Procurement | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Appeals | 6 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Total | 11 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 6 |
Judicial reviews of Special Import Measures Act cases
One application for judicial review was filed before the FCA, on December 18, 2023, regarding the Tribunal’s finding in Certain Wind Towers (NQ-2023-001). It was withdrawn on December 22, 2023.
Details
Pie chart of judicial reviews of Special Import Measures Act cases during the fiscal year.
Of the eight decisions issued by the Tribunal under this mandate, only one was challenged before the Federal Court of Appeal.
The FCA issued its decision in the judicial review, filed in a prior fiscal year, relating to the Tribunal’s finding in Decorative and Other Non-structural Plywood (NQ-2020-002). The FCA dismissed the application for judicial review, as it was of the view that the Tribunal’s finding was reasonable.
Judicial reviews of procurement complaints
There was one application for judicial review of a decision by the Tribunal in a procurement complaint this fiscal year.
Details
Pie chart of judicial reviews of procurement decisions issued during the fiscal year.
Of the 61 decisions issued by the Tribunal under this mandate, only one was challenged before the Federal Court of Appeal.
During this fiscal year, four applications for judicial review of Tribunal decisions filed in previous fiscal years came to a close. The FCA allowed the application for judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision in Heiltsuk Horizon Maritime Services Ltd./Horizon Maritime Services Ltd. v. Department of Public Works and Government Services (PR-2020-068). The FCA set aside the Tribunal’s decision and declared the complaint valid. As a result, the Tribunal re-opened its inquiry to recommend an appropriate remedy for the complainant. That process was ongoing at the end of the fiscal year.
The FCA also dismissed the applications for judicial review filed by complainants relating to the Tribunal’s decisions in Terra Reproductions Inc. (PR-2022-069) (dismissed on the merits) and Sunny Jaura d.b.a. Jaura Enterprises (PR-2018-058) (dismissed for delay following a status review). The application for judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision in Chantier Davie Canada Inc. and Wärtsilä Canada Inc. v. Department of Public Works and Government Services (PR-2022-053) was discontinued by the applicant, Heddle Marine Service Inc.
Appeals of Customs Act and Special Import Measures Act appeal decisions
Five of the Tribunal’s decisions under this mandate were challenged in the FCA this fiscal year.
| AP-2021-004 | AP-2020-030 | AP-2019-007 | AP-2022-015 | AP-2022-004 & AP-2022-017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Appellant | Centric Brands d.b.a. KHQ Investments LLP | Interpro Distributeurs de Viandes inc. | James B. Byrne | Best Buy Canada Ltd. | Medline Canada Corporation |
| Date of Tribunal’s decision | May 23, 2023 | June 7, 2023 | July 17, 2023 | November 8, 2023 | January 29, 2024 |
| FCA court status | Withdrawn | Pending | Pending | Pending | Pending |
Details
Pie chart of appeals of customs and excise appeal decisions during the fiscal year.
Of the 29 decisions issued by the Tribunal under this mandate, five were challenged before the Federal Court of Appeal.
During this fiscal year, the FCA dismissed appeals, filed in previous years, of Tribunal decisions in Canadian Tire Corporation Limited v. President of the Canada Border Services Agency (AP-2020-020) and Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc. v. President of the Canada Border Services Agency (AP-2019-047).
The FCA also dismissed the appeal of the Tribunal’s decision in Remington Sales Co. d.b.a. Hyundai Heavy Industries (Canada) v. President of the Canada Border Services Agency (EA-2019-009), but it allowed the cross-appeals of the Tribunal’s decisions in that case and in Hyundai Canada Inc. v. President of the Canada Border Services Agency (EA-2019-008 and EA-2019-010). The appeal of the Tribunal’s decision in Hyundai Canada Inc. had been discontinued by the appellant in a prior fiscal year.