Enniss v. Canada ( Human Rights Commission )
T-2992-93
Nadon J.
24/11/95
4 pp.
Application for leave to amend style of cause to add Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development as respondent-Court Direction previously indicating Department proper respondent-Federal Court Rules, R. 1602(3) providing any interested person adverse in interest to applicant in proceedings before federal board, commission or other tribunal shall be named as respondent in notice of motion-Generally any party heard in proceedings before federal board, and who opposed applicant, must be named-Even where not respondents, federal board and Attorney General must be served with originating notice of motion pursuant to R. 1604-Glaxo Canada Inc. v. Department of National Health & Welfare of Government of Canada et al. (1978), 15 C.P.R. (3d) 1 (F.C.T.D.) holding government department not legal entity, therefore cannot be named as party-Proper respondent Minister, not Department-Applicant allowed to add Minister as respondent even though not requested in motion as previous Direction of Court misleading-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, RR. 1602(3) (as enacted by SOR/92-43, s. 19), 1604 (as enacted idem).