Ontario Superior Court of Justice Strikes Pilot’s Negligence Claim Against Transport Canada for Medical Certificate Refusal

TOP STORY

Plaintiff was commercial pilot whose medical certificate was not renewed in 2017 because Regional Aviation Medical Officer assessed him as medically unfit due to alcohol use disorder – plaintiff was granted restricted medical certificate upon review, but was refused unrestricted medical certificate – in 2022, Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada found that evidence showed no current or past alcohol use disorder – plaintiff ultimately received unrestricted medical certificate – plaintiff commenced action for damages – at motion, only negligence claim remained – defendant Attorney General of Canada (“AGC”), representing Minister of Transport and Transport Canada, brought motion to strike claim for failure to disclose reasonable cause of action and for being time-barred – Superior Court of Justice denied motion to strike on basis of limitation period – not plain and obvious that claim was barred by Limitations Act, 2002 – issue of discoverability better left for trial – Court noted that successful negligence claim requires plaintiff to establish that defendant owed plaintiff a duty of care – requires sufficient proximity between the parties to justify imposition of duty of care in the circumstances – Court found no duty of care owed by defendant to plaintiff – case law established that regulator’s duties owed to public, not regulated entities – Aeronautics Act and Canadian Aviation Regulations did not contemplate duty of care owed to pilots – interactions between plaintiff and Transport Canada did not create relationship of proximity – policy reasons against duty of care – recognizing duty of care to pilots could extend to other certificate holders, creating risk of indeterminate liability – if duty of care recognized, Transport Canada would be required to balance personal interest of regulated entities against goal of public safety – prospect of being sued by pilot could have chilling effect on doctors and decision-makers in medical certification process – exercise of statutory functions by officials do not give rise to cause of action in tort law – plain and obvious that allegations do not disclose reasonable cause of action in negligence – claim struck without leave to amend, with costs to AGC 

2025 ONSC 2173 (CanLII) | Davis v. Attorney General of Canada et al | CanLII

Decisions

  • Delay, cancelled visa – Turmero v. Air Canada2025 FC 673 Plaintiff and her three children were travelling to Toronto from Venezuela, via Panama, to join her husband studying in Canada on study permit – visas were cancelled at check-in following concerns raised by airline agent that plaintiffs intended to overstay visas, but were later reissued – plaintiff and children were delayed 33 days in Panama – plaintiff claimed US$4,520.13 in compensatory damages for delay under Article 19 of Montreal Convention – Federal Court found that defence to liability under Article 19 requires carrier to prove it took all reasonable measures to avoid delay and resulting damage – plaintiff and children had valid passports and required visas and travel documents at check-in – delay was caused by cancellation of visa, directly resulting from chain of events set in motion by Air Canada – Court drew adverse inference from failure to provide testimony from airline agent who did not enter visa information into system – another airline agent failed to pass information on to CBSA officer relating to expiry of husband’s study permit – airline could not prove it took all reasonable measures to avoid delay – since Air Canada was found liable, unnecessary to decide alternative claim against Attorney General of Canada (“AGC”), but Court considered the claim in the interest of completeness – negligence claim failed – numerous cases holding no duty of care between Canadian immigration authorities and those subject to immigration decisions – public law damages claim failed – Supreme Court of Canada has rejected notion of public law damages – claim against AGC dismissed – Court rejected airline’s argument that plaintiff failed to mitigate damages by not returning to Venezuela – Court rejected claim for pharmacy expenses not directly related to delay and claims without receipts – plaintiff was awarded CA$4,129.04, equivalent to US$3,283.27, plus interest – costs as agreed or to be addressed by submissions
  • Contract, amounts owing – Pellin c. Ikaros International Flight Training inc., 2025 QCCQ 880 Claim and counterclaim regarding amounts owing under contract for flying lessons – plaintiff claimed lessons invoiced at higher hourly rate than agreed and amounts billed for an instructor when plaintiff’s son was flying alone – at trial, defendant acknowledged that certain amounts initially invoiced did not comply with agreement reached – defendant filed revised table of flight hours and amounts billed in which erroneous hourly rates were reduced and amounts erroneously booked for the presence of an instructor cancelled for flights where plaintiff’s son was flying alone – plaintiff confirmed amounts invoiced in the corrected table were in accordance with agreement reached regarding flight hours – installment for contribution to cost of maintaining aircraft used for training left in dispute – plaintiff provided proof during the trial that this payment had been made – plaintiff was awarded $2,769,17 as reimbursement for overcharges
  • Application, jury notice extension – Batiste v WestJet Airlines Ltd. (d.b.a. Swoop Inc.)2025 BCSC 663 Plaintiffs claimed damages for defamation, breach of contract, and intentional infliction of mental suffering – plaintiffs were asked to leave aircraft prior to take-off due to incident relating to seating – plaintiffs filed application seeking leave to extend period of time to file and serve jury notice – defendant had objected to late filing – Court determined it was appropriate to exercise discretion to extend time to file and serve jury notice – correspondence between parties referenced jury trial, including on day the Notice of Trial was filed – failure to file notice was inadvertence – correspondence between parties contemplated jury trial – defendants did not assert prejudice from late filing and service of jury notice – extension granted to file and serve jury notice – costs awardable at discretion of hearing judge

CTA News and Decisions  

  • Application – Meridian Air Group, Inc. – Determination No. A-2025-63 Application for suspension of Licence 020113 – licence suspended

TC/TSB News 

Industry Association News

Union News 

Airport News 

Rotary Operator News

General Aviation News

Related Articles

Air Transat Pilots Call for a Modern Contract as Decade-Old Agreement Expires

TOP STORY MONTREAL — Today marks the expiration of the Air Transat pilots’ collective agreement that had been in place…

Air Canada Ordered to Pay Passengers $10M in Damages After Class Action Over Ticket Prices

TOP STORY The Quebec Court of Appeal is ordering Air Canada to pay passengers more than $10 million in damages…

Aviation Consortium Celebrates First Piloted Hydrogen-Powered Flight

TOP STORY VANCOUVER – A Vancouver-based aviation consortium says it is celebrating the first ever piloted hydrogen-powered helicopter flight, calling…