Can a declaration be made in the context of an analysis of the validity of the PUP 1506?

While the Judicial Review Procedure Act may not provide for such declarations, standing alone, I take it that it is open to me, in interpreting the Act so that I may apply it to the context of the fact pattern before me, to determine the purpose of the Act. Thus, such a “declaration” can be made, but in the context of an analysis of the validity of the petitioner’s application for review of the Minister’s decision to amend PUP 1506. It is not a declaration that could be sought independent of that analytical framework. In my view, therefore, this meets the criteria enunciated by Mr. Justice Hood in Fraser v. Houston (4 October 1996) Vancouver C963803; [1996] B.C.J. No. 2096 (B.C.S.C.) (Q.L.) at para. 29: It is my opinion, that while there need not necessarily be a cause of action between the parties before the court will have jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief, and that jurisdiction is quite broad, it is not at large or unfettered. A litigant seeking declaratory relief must demonstrate that he or she has a right which has been infringed by, or requires protection from, the other party. If the right cannot be demonstrated, the party does not have standing and the court does not have declaratory jurisdiction.