Decision No. 713-C-A-2006

December 28, 2006

File No. M4370/06-08014

APPLICATION

On November 30, 2006, Soheir Ibrahim filed with the Canadian Transportation Agency (hereinafter the Agency) the application set out in the title.

BACKGROUND

In its Decision No. 575-C-A-2006, the Agency made its determination with respect to a complaint filed by Soheir Ibrahim against Air Transat A.T. Inc. carrying on business as Air Transat (hereinafter Air Transat) concerning the carrier's refusal to transport her and her husband from Toronto, Ontario, Canada to Manchester, England on August 25, 2005.

The Agency determined that Air Transat properly applied its terms and conditions of carriage as set out in Rule 6 of its tariff, when it refused to transport the Ibrahims from Toronto to Manchester, and when it refused to refund the air fare. The Agency found that the Ibrahims demonstrated behaviour which justified the decision by Air Transat to refuse transportation, and that the Ibrahims were not entitled to a refund of the air fare. Accordingly, the Agency dismissed the complaint.

JURISDICTION OF THE AGENCY

Pursuant to section 32 of the Canada Transportation Act (hereinafter the CTA), the Agency may review, rescind or vary any decision made by it if, in the opinion of the Agency, since the issuance of the decision, there has been a change in the facts or circumstances pertaining to the decision.

It is important to stress at the outset that the review contemplated by section 32 of the CTA is not an open-ended authority for the Agency to review its decisions. The Agency's jurisdiction under this section is limited and only arises if there has been a change in the facts or circumstances pertaining to the decision since its issuance. The Agency must first determine whether there has been a change in the facts or circumstances pertaining to the decision and, if so, then determine whether such change is sufficient to warrant a review, rescission or variance of the decision.

ISSUE

The issue to be addressed is whether the information submitted by Mrs. Ibrahim in her application for review constitutes a change in facts or circumstances since Decision No. 575-C-A-2006 was issued.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Mrs. Ibrahim submits that she is dissatisfied with Decision No. 575-C-A-2006 as it fails to address why her carry-on bag registered three different weights of 9.5 kg, 10.5 kg and 12.5 kg on the same scale used during check-in procedures for her flight.

The Agency is of the opinion that Mrs. Ibrahim's submission does not present new facts or circumstances within the meaning of section 32 of the CTA. A party to an application cannot take advantage of section 32 of the CTA to reargue its case unless there has been a real change in the facts and circumstances since the original decision.

In light of the foregoing, the Agency finds that the information provided by Mrs. Ibrahim does not constitute new facts or circumstances, as contemplated by section 32 of the CTA, pertaining to Decision No. 575-C-A-2006 since it was issued.

CONCLUSION

Based on the above finding, the Agency hereby dismisses the application filed by Mrs. Ibrahim for review of Decision No. 575-C-A-2006.

Members

• Mary-Jane Bennett
• Baljinder Gill