Francoeur

A-224-96

CORAM: Marceau J.A., Denault, J.A., Décary J.A.

Between: Attorney General of Canada, Appellant, and Julie A. Francoeur, Respondent.

Reasons for Judgment of the Court (Delivered from the bench at Ottawa, Ontario on Tuesday, June 3, 1997)

Marceau J.A.

We are all of the opinion that this appeal from a decision rendered by the Trial Division on an application for judicial review is well founded.

The decision before the motions judge in the Trial Division, which was made by an adjudicator appointed under section 93 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act, concerned the interpretation to be given to a clause of a collective agreement. It is clear, and counsel are in agreement, that pursuant to the principles established by the Supreme Court (recently restated in Canada (Attorney General) v. Public Service Alliance of Canada, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 941), such a decision cannot be set aside on review unless the judge determining its validity can conclude that it is obviously and clearly wrong. It certainly does not seem that the judge in this case performed his role using the approach required by these principles. He simply took it upon himself to consider the interpretation problem raised by the apparent conflict between the English and French versions of the clause in question, and he criticized the adjudicator for preferring the more restrictive French version, ultimately because he felt that the English version seemed more consistent with the entire agreement and could prevent future staff relations problems. That is far from being a conclusion that the adjudicator’s interpretation was clearly wrong.

On the contrary, we believe that it is certainly not unreasonable to prefer the more restrictive version, as the adjudicator did — a basic rule when interpreting two official versions that differ, and a rule that the interpreter cannot disregard without a serious reason, because doing so leads the interpreter to ignore an express restriction in the provision — and thereby to sanction the idea that questions concerning the remuneration of employees in a bargaining unit must be resolved on the basis of the hierarchical classification of positions reserved for those employees alone.

The appeal will therefore be allowed, the Trial Division’s decision set aside and the adjudicator’s decision restored.

Louis Marceau, J.A.

Certified true translation: A. Poirier