Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 SEPTEMBER 2016

Runkle v Alberta (Chief Firearms Officer): Mootness Is Alive And Well

In its decision in Runkle v. Alberta (Chief Firearms Officer), the Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the Court of Queen's Bench on the basis of mootness.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In its decision in Runkle v. Alberta (Chief Firearms Officer), the Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the Court of Queen's Bench on the basis of mootness. The respondent Runkle had originally brought a claim against the Chief Firearms Officer of Alberta ("CFAO"), because the CFOA had amended the respondent's Long-Term Authorization to Transport Firearms to exclude permission to transport his firearm to a gunsmith. However, by the time the appeal reached the Alberta Court of Appeal, the respondent had received the authorization he originally sought from the CFOA. Therefore, the respondent requested to have the appeal dismissed on the grounds that the case was now moot. Conversely, the CFOA wanted the appeal to be heard, for fear that the Queen's Bench decision would set a problematic precedent.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from