What is the test for determining whether a claim is moot?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from J. Cote & Son Excavating Ltd. v City of Burnaby, 2017 BCSC 2323 (CanLII):

Both counsel refer to the well-known authority on mootness found in Borowski v. Canada (Attorney General), 1989 CanLII 123 (SCC), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 342. That case sets out a two-stage test for determining whether an action is moot at 353: The doctrine of mootness is an aspect of a general policy or practice that a court may decline to decide a case which raises merely a hypothetical or abstract question. The general principle applies when the decision of the court will not have the effect of resolving some controversy which affects or may affect the rights of the parties. If the decision of the court will have no practical effect on such rights, the court will decline to decide the case. This essential ingredient must be present not only when the action or proceeding is commenced but at the time when the court is called upon to reach a decision. Accordingly if, subsequent to the initiation of the action or proceeding, events occur which affect the relationship of the parties so that no present live controversy exists which affects the rights of the parties, the case is said to be moot. The general policy or practice is enforced in moot cases unless the court exercises its discretion to depart from its policy or practice. The relevant factors relating to the exercise of the court's discretion are discussed hereinafter. The approach in recent cases involves a two-step analysis. First it is necessary to determine whether the required tangible and concrete dispute has disappeared and the issues have become academic. Second, if the response to the first question is affirmative, it is necessary to decide if the court should exercise its discretion to hear the case. The cases do not always make it clear whether the term "moot" applies to cases that do not present a concrete controversy or whether the term applies only to such of those cases as the court declines to hear. In the interest of clarity, I consider that a case is moot if it fails to meet the "live controversy" test. A court may nonetheless elect to address a moot issue if the circumstances warrant.

Other Questions


How have courts considered mootness in determining whether a claim is mooted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the legal test for determining whether there has been anordinate delay in determining whether a claim has been successful? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is resolution of an important part of a claim against a party in a personal injury claim against the other party to the claim substantially less impact on the balance of the claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a claim in a personal injury action against a former partner is a common law claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a claim can be successful at the Workers’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the threshold issue in determining whether a person can claim an income loss of more than $100,000? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the factors used to determine whether a parent has a valid parental mobility claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a hypothetical or speculative opportunity can be used to determine damages for future loss of earnings as a result of a motor vehicle accident? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the threshold question for determining whether an application is moot? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for “substantial success” in determining whether either party had a good chance of success in their claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.