2015 FC, 2015 FC 1039

Date: 20150901 Docket: T-2557-14 Citation: 2015 FC 1039 Ottawa, Ontario, September 1st, 2015 PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Gagné BETWEEN:ALI SBEITIApplicantandTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA (THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE) ANDPASSPORT CANADARespondents ORDER AND REASONS [1] The applicant has brought an application for judicial review of Passport Canada’s decision to invalidate his passport. He isasking this Court to set aside the decision and to send the matter back to Passport Canada for a new determination.

As a new passport hassince been issued in his favour, the respondents have filed a written motion for an order striking out the notice of application in itsentirety, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 [Rules], on the basis that it became moot. [2] The applicant contends that there is still a live issue between the parties and that if the Court does not invalidate the decision,he might be faced with a similar problem in the future: the information that led to the withdrawal of his Canadian passport came from theCanadian Security Intelligence Service [CSIS], which allegedly constitutes a breach of his privacy right as guaranteed by

section 8 of theCharter.

He adds that one of the practical effects of a judgment invalidating the decision would be to correct or exclude certaininformation from his file at Passport Canada. [3] Respectfully, I am of the view that the issuance of a passport, which covers the same validity period as for the previouspassport, provides the applicant with the substantive relief sought in his application for judicial review and renders the matter moot. [4] First, any future decision of the respondents, if challenged before this Court, would have to be reviewed in light of thematerial that was before the decision maker.

A judgment from the Court in the present matter would not necessarily be binding on futuredecisions by the respondents. [5] Second, this Court does not have jurisdiction at first instance to grant the new relief sought by the applicant – let alone thefact that the applicant is changing the nature of his application. With respect to the transmission of information by CSIS, the applicantcan file a complaint with the Security Intelligence Review Committee, pursuant to paragraph 38(1)(

c) of the Canadian SecurityIntelligence Service Act, RSC, 1985, c C-23. As to the correction of the information contained in his file with Passport Canada, theapplicant has to follow the steps provided for in the Privacy Act, RSC, 1985, c P-21 and request the correction of the information fromPassport Canada.

Should he be unsatisfied with the result of his request, he could file a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner ofCanada. [6] Any judgment that could be rendered by this Court on the merits of the applicant’s application for judicial review wouldhave little bearing outside its specific set of facts. “It is preferable to wait and determine the point in a genuine adversarial context unlessthe circumstances suggest that the dispute will have always disappeared before it is ultimately resolved” (Borowski v Canada (AttorneyGeneral), (SCC), [1989] 1 SCR 342, at para 36). [7] Finally, the respondents have rightfully requested that the style of cause be amended to name only the Attorney General ofCanada as respondent, as per Rule 303(2) of the Rules. [8] For these reasons, the respondents’ motion will be granted, the applicant’s application for judicial review will be struck outand the style of cause will be so amended.

Considering the special circumstances of this case, each party will bear its own costs on thismotion and on the application for judicial review. ORDER THIS COURT ORDERS that: 1. The respondents’ motion is granted; 2. The application for judicial review is dismissed; and 3. No costs are granted on this motion or on the application for judicial review. "Jocelyne Gagné"

Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-2557-14 STYLE OF CAUSE: ALI SBEITI v THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA (THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE) AND PASSPORT CANADA PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES ORDER AND REASONS: GAGNÉ J. DATED: sEPTEMBER 1, 2015 APPEARANCES : Ms. Johanne Doyon Mr. Mitchell Goldberg For The Applicant Ms. Patricia Nobl For The RespondentS SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Ms. Johanne Doyon Mr. Mitchell Goldberg Montréal (Québec) For The Applicant Ms. Patricia Nobl Montréal (Québec) For The RespondentS