Fourier v. Canada (Solicitor general)
Court headnote
Fourier v. Canada (Solicitor general) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-10-23 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 1100 File numbers T-750-02 Decision Content Date: 20021023 Docket: T-750-02 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 1100 Winnipeg, Manitoba, this 23rd day of October, 2002 PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN A. O'KEEFE BETWEEN: LUC FOURNIER Applicant - and - THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER O'KEEFE J. [1] This is a motion made by the applicant on October 7, 2002 for leave to serve and file a further affidavit of Luc Fournier, dated September 30, 2002. [2] A perusal of the affidavit shows that it is primarily a reorganization of the applicant's first affidavit, which he filed without the assistance of counsel. [3] The respondent takes exception to paragraphs 11 and 19 of the proposed affidavit and states that it is not necessary to file the further affidavit. [4] I have reviewed paragraphs 11 and 19 and I am of the view that both paragraphs can remain part of the affidavit. Paragraph 11 states that two supervisors were not trained complaint assessors. It seems to me that this is a statement of fact. The applicant may be right or wrong about this fact. I should add that there does not appear to be a definition for "complaint assessor" and the applicant addresses this argument as a procedural right to have trained complaint assessors. [5] As to paragraph 19 of the affidavit, this paragraph also makes statements of fact. [6] I am…
Read full judgment
Fourier v. Canada (Solicitor general) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-10-23 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 1100 File numbers T-750-02 Decision Content Date: 20021023 Docket: T-750-02 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 1100 Winnipeg, Manitoba, this 23rd day of October, 2002 PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN A. O'KEEFE BETWEEN: LUC FOURNIER Applicant - and - THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER O'KEEFE J. [1] This is a motion made by the applicant on October 7, 2002 for leave to serve and file a further affidavit of Luc Fournier, dated September 30, 2002. [2] A perusal of the affidavit shows that it is primarily a reorganization of the applicant's first affidavit, which he filed without the assistance of counsel. [3] The respondent takes exception to paragraphs 11 and 19 of the proposed affidavit and states that it is not necessary to file the further affidavit. [4] I have reviewed paragraphs 11 and 19 and I am of the view that both paragraphs can remain part of the affidavit. Paragraph 11 states that two supervisors were not trained complaint assessors. It seems to me that this is a statement of fact. The applicant may be right or wrong about this fact. I should add that there does not appear to be a definition for "complaint assessor" and the applicant addresses this argument as a procedural right to have trained complaint assessors. [5] As to paragraph 19 of the affidavit, this paragraph also makes statements of fact. [6] I am satisfied that the proposed affidavit meets the test for granting leave: it serves the interests of justice, it will assist the Court in deciding the final issue and it will not cause substantial prejudice to the respondent (see Wayzhushk Onigum Nation v. Kakeway, [2000] F.C.J. No. 156 (QL) (Proth.) and Eli Lilly and Co. v. Apotex Inc., [1997] F.C.J. No. 1240 (QL) (T.D.)). [7] The applicant's motion for leave to serve and file the further affidavit of Luc Fournier, dated September 30, 2002, is granted. The affidavit is to be served and filed within two days of the receipt of this order. [8] As Justice Noel ordered that cross-examinations of the parties were to have been completed no later than October 11, 2002, I order that cross-examinations of the parties shall be completed by November 8, 2002. [9] There shall be no order as to costs. ORDER [10] IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Leave to serve and file the further affidavit of Luc Fournier is granted and the affidavit is to be served and filed within two days of the receipt of this order. 2. Cross-examinations of the parties shall be completed by November 8, 2002. "John A. O'Keefe" J.F.C.C. Winnipeg, Manitoba October 23, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-750-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: LUC FOURNIER - and - THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA PLACE OF HEARING: Edmonton, Alberta DATE OF HEARING: Monday, October 7, 2002 REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER OF O'KEEFE J. DATED: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 APPEARANCES: Ms. Melodi Ulku FOR APPLICANT Mr. Rick Garvin FOR RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Bishop & McKenzie LLP Suite 2500 10104 - 103 Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5J 1V3 FOR APPLICANT Department of Justice 211 Bank of Montreal Building 10199 - 101 Street Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3Y4 FOR RESPONDENT FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION Date: 20021023 Docket: T-750-02 BETWEEN: LUC FOURNIER Applicant - and - THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca