| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
jurisdiction |
|
|
Summary:
This case involved the exchange of information between Customs and HRDC. The Court having decided (T-864-98) that such an exchange was not permitted under the Privacy Act, the claimant asked to have the amount of overpayment and penalty that he had already paid returned, along with damages. The Court declared that it did not have the jurisdiction to decide on the action for damages because of the exclusive appeal mechanism provided by the Act to challenge the Commission's decisions, namely appealing to the Board of Referees, then the Umpire and finally requesting a judicial review under section 28 of the Federal Court Act. Claimant's motion dismissed.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
appeal system |
levels |
|
Summary:
This case involved the exchange of information between Customs and HRDC. The Court having decided (T-864-98) that such an exchange was not permitted under the Privacy Act, the claimant asked to have the amount of overpayment and penalty that he had already paid returned, along with damages. The Court declared that it did not have the jurisdiction to decide on the action for damages because of the exclusive appeal mechanism provided by the Act to challenge the Commission's decisions, namely appealing to the Board of Referees, then the Umpire and finally requesting a judicial review under section 28 of the Federal Court Act. Claimant's motion dismissed.
