O'Driscoll v. Canada (Public Safety)

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, fct, 2026fc1152, 2026 fc 1152 (canlii), 2026, fc, 1152, (canlii), t-2207-26, 2026, administrative law, judicial review, federal courts act, s. 18.1, motion to strike, whether application is “doomed to fail” for lack of a reviewable “matter”, no decision shown to affect legal rights, impose legal obligations, or cause prejudicial effects, canada (attorney general) v democracy watch applied, motion dismissed, administrative law, reviewable decision, ministerial correspondence, whether minister’s non, response or minister’s letter is reviewable, characterization of “courtesy letter” rejected as determinative, applicant unable to establish any legal right to compel an answer, o’driscoll fca treated as binding authority, appeal dismissed, administrative law, mandamus, apotex inc v canada (attorney general) (c.a.), [1994] 1 fc 742, whether minister owed a public legal duty and applicant had a clear right, pleading largely discretionary statutory provisions insufficient, grant of statutory authority not enforceable absent legally cognizable right, mandamus refused, evidence, motion record, affidavits on rule 51 motion, whether affidavits refused below should be included on appeal, exhibits incorporated by reference and agreed admissible, remainder excluded as not challenged and not relevant, motion dismissed with costs awarded under tariff b high end column 1 table 3 and table 4 itemised amounts excluded