Desjardins v. Lavallée

Desjardins v. Lavallée
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2001-11-21
Neutral citation
2001 FCA 359
File numbers
A-458-99
Decision Content
Date: 20011121
Docket: A-458-99
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 359
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYNALD DESJARDINS
Appellant
and
SERGE LAVALLÉE
and
NATIONAL PAROLE BOARD
(APPEAL DIVISION)
and
LISE BOUTHILLER
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondents
Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec on November 21, 2001
Judgment from the bench at Montréal, Quebec on November 21, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A.
Date: 20011121
Docket: A-458-99
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 359
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYNALD DESJARDINS
Appellant
and
SERGE LAVALLÉE
and
NATIONAL PAROLE BOARD
(APPEAL DIVISION)
and
LISE BOUTHILLER
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec
on November 21, 2001)
NOËL J.A.
[1] In our opinion, the motion judge was wrong to conclude that Jean Dugré's affidavit did not establish the existence of a serious question because it was based essentially on hearsay.
[2] It is true that that affidavit did not establish the truth of the statements attributed by the deponent to Mr. Dutil but, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it was proof of the fact that Mr. Dutil made those statements. No evidence to the contrary was presented and the respondents did not see fit to cross-examine the deponent.
[3] In these circumstances, the affidavit in question establishes the existence of a serious question and the trial judge had no choice but to recognize this.
[4] As to the delay, the motion judge did not hold it as a reason for dismissal and, based on the evidence before us, it seems clear that the appellant was able to justify it.
[5] For these reasons the appeal will be allowed, the trial judgment reversed and, rendering the judgment which the trial judge ought to have rendered, the motion for an extension of time will be granted. The application for judicial review must be filed within ten days of the judgment to be rendered.
Marc Noël
J.A.
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
Date: 20011121
Docket : A-458-99
Between:
RAYNALD DESJARDINS
Appellant
and
SERGE LAVALLÉE
and
NATIONAL PAROLE BOARD
(APPEAL DIVISION)
and
LISE BOUTHILLER
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
FILE: A-458-99
Appeal from order made by Trial Division in case T-18-99 on June 24, 1999
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
STYLE OF CAUSE: RAYNALD DESJARDINS
Appellant
and
SERGE LAVALLÉE
and
NATIONAL PAROLE BOARD
(APPEAL DIVISION)
and
LISE BOUTHILLER
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondents
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: November 21, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A.
DATED: November 21, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Julius Grey FOR THE APPELLANT
Nadia Hudon FOR THE RESPONDENT
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Grey, Casgrain FOR THE APPELLANT
Montréal, Quebec
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Montréal, Quebec