This decision considered whether Ministers of the Crown can be compelled to Questioning under section 11 of the Proceedings Against the Crown Act, RSA 2000, c P-25  (“PACA”).

The Court considered Rule 5.17(1)(b) which permits the examination of officers or former officers of a corporation “who have or appear to have relevant and material information that was acquired because they are or were officers of the corporation”. The Court interpreted Rule 5.17(1)(b), in principle, to include Ministers of the Crown, noting that section 1(c) of PACA and Rule 5.17(1)(b) puts Ministers of the Crown in the same position as officers of a corporation and in principle would apply to former Minister Savage and Minister Nixon. However, the Court considered the test in the leading case of Leeds v Alta, 1989 ABCA 208, concluding that the test was not met, as there are no special circumstances that existed requiring Questioning of the Minister or former Minister, and they are not the best person informed to answer the posed questions. Therefore, neither former Minister Savage nor Minister Nixon needed to attend for Questioning.