What is the threshold question for determining whether an application is moot?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from British Columbia (Director of Civil Forfeiture) v. Flegel, 2014 BCSC 1168 (CanLII):

This intervening sale of the property raises the threshold question of whether this application is moot. The leading authority on this topic is Borowski v. Canada (Attorney General), 1989 CanLII 123 (SCC), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 342 at p. 353, which provides the following principles: 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 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


In determining whether to grant a Rule 18A trial on part of a trust application, what is the risk that the findings of the application may be carried over to the subsequent determination of other issues? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts considered mootness in determining whether a claim is mooted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the factors used to determine the diligence factor in determining whether to grant an application in a personal injury case? (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)
What is the applicable standard of review for the purpose of determining whether a decision was reasonable? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a claim is moot? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether an emergency is an emergency and, if so, what are the relevant questions? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the issues to be determined on an application for summary determination under Rule 18A? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the relevant factors for determining whether either of two possible jurisdictions would be suitable for the determination of issues raised by the litigation at issue? (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)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.