Law360 Canada ( May 12, 2025, 2:57 PM EDT) -- Appeal by appellants against the Attorney General of Canada, challenging the dismissal of their applications for judicial review concerning Alberta’s provincial court jurisdiction under s. 74 of the Firearms Act. The appellants received a letter from the Registrar of Firearms indicating that their firearms had been reclassified as prohibited due to regulatory amendments. They considered this a revocation of their registration certificates and sought a provincial court review under s. 74 of the Firearms Act. The Attorney General argued that the letter was informational and not a revocation notice, a position upheld by the summary trial judge. The appellants then filed originating applications in the Court of King’s Bench for a judicial review of the summary trial judge’s decision. They sought orders of “certiorari and mandamus compelling the Alberta Court of Justice to hear” their s. 74 references. The appellants’ judicial review was adjourned pending the outcome of the Canada (Attorney General) v. Smykot case. However, the judicial review judge refused to interfere with the jurisdiction decision, finding the court’s judgment in Smykot dispositive. The judicial review judge found no basis to distinguish the appellants’ cases from Smykot, leading to the dismissal of their application. The appellants challenged the dismissal of their applications for judicial review concerning the jurisdiction of Alberta’s provincial court to hear their cases under s. 74 of the Firearms Act. The appellants argued that the Smykot case was wrongly decided and sought to distinguish their cases based on specific facts, such as the use of an algorithm to generate the letter and the classification of the appellants’ firearm as an unnamed variant....