Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright)

Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date 2012-03-20
Neutral citation 2012 FCA 96
File numbers A-339-11

Decision Content

Federal Court of Appeal

 

Cour d'appel fédérale

Date: 20120320

Dockets: A-339-11

A-395-11

Citation: 2012 FCA 96

 

CORAM:       SHARLOW J.A.

                        DAWSON J.A.

                        STRATAS J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES OF CANADA

 and THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA

 and BRANDON UNIVERSITY

Applicants

and

THE CANADIAN COPYRIGHT LICENSING AGENCY

OPERATING AS "ACCESS COPYRIGHT"

Respondent

and

 

COPYRIGHT BOARD OF CANADA

 

Intervener

 

 

 

Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 20, 2012.

Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 20, 2012.

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                             SHARLOW J.A.

 

Federal Court of Appeal

 

Cour d'appel fédérale

Date: 20120320

Dockets: A-339-11

Docket: A-395-11

Citation: 2012 FCA 96

 

CORAM:       SHARLOW J.A.

                        DAWSON J.A.

                        STRATAS J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES OF CANADA

 and THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA

 and BRANDON UNIVERSITY

Applicants

and

THE CANADIAN COPYRIGHT LICENSING AGENCY

 OPERATING AS "ACCESS COPYRIGHT"

Respondent

and

 

COPYRIGHT BOARD OF CANADA

 

Intervener

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 20, 2012)

SHARLOW J.A.

[1]               Before the Court are two applications for judicial review of interlocutory decisions of the Copyright Board rendered in connection with a proposed tariff entitled “Educational Institutions Tariff (2011-2013)”. The decisions under review are dated August 18, 2011 and September 23, 2011.

 

[2]               Despite the able submissions of counsel for the applicants, we have concluded that there are no special circumstances that would justify the intervention of the Court at this stage of the proceedings before the Copyright Board. This is manifestly a case where the Copyright Board should be permitted to complete its work before the Court is called upon to consider administrative law remedies.

 

[3]               For that reason, these applications for judicial review will be dismissed with costs payable to the respondent.

 

 

“K. Sharlow”

J.A.

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

 

DOCKET:                                                                              A-339-11

 

(APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY DECISIONS OF THE COPYRIGHT BOARD DATED AUGUST 18, 2011 AND SEPTEMBER 23, 2011)

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                              ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES OF CANADA

                                                                                                and THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA and BRANDON UNIVERSITY v. THE CANADIAN COPYRIGHT LICENSING AGENCY

                                                                                                (OPERATING AS "ACCESS COPYRIGHT" and COPYRIGHT BOARD OF CANADA

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                        OTTAWA

 

DATE OF HEARING:                                                          March 20, 2012

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:       (SHARLOW, DAWSON, STRATAS JJ.A.)

 

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                            SHARLOW J.A.

 

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Patricia J. Wilson

FOR THE APPLICANT

 

Nancy Brooks  

Randall Hofley

 

Mario Bouchard

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

FOR THE INTERVENER

 

 

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

FOR THE APPLICANT

 

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

 

Counsel, Copyright Board of Canada

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

FOR THE INTERVENER

 

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.