Schreiber v. Canada (Attorney General)

Schreiber v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2008-04-21
Neutral citation
2008 FCA 147
File numbers
A-334-07
Decision Content
Date: 20080421
Docket: A-334-07
Citation: 2008 FCA 147
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
EVANS J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
BETWEEN:
KARLHEINZ SCHREIBER
Appellant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA,
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA,
AND THE COMMISSIONER OF THE RCMP
Respondents
Heard at Edmonton, Alberta, on April 21, 2008.
Judgment delivered at Edmonton, Ontario, on April 21, 2008.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: EVANS J.A.
Date: 20080421
Docket: A-334-07
Citation: 2008 FCA 147
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
EVANS J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
BETWEEN:
KARLHEINZ SCHREIBER
Appellant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA,
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA,
AND THE COMMISSIONER OF THE RCMP
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the Bench, at Edmonton, Alberta, on April 21, 2008.)
EVANS J.A.
[1] This is an appeal by Karlheinz Schreiber from a decision of Justice Phelan of the Federal Court (2007 FC 618) dismissing an application for judicial review to stay his extradition to Germany. Mr Schreiber alleges that members of the RCMP and other Canadian government officials have violated his rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, thus tainting the surrender order against him and its implementation.
[2] We are all of the view that this appeal is without merit. Justice Phelan committed no reversible error when he exercised his discretion to dismiss the application without entering into the substance of Mr Schreiber’s allegations. Each and every one of these allegations either was or could have been raised before the Ontario courts in the various proceedings brought there by Mr Schreiber to challenge all stages of the extradition process, or was or could have been put before the Minister of Justice as the basis of a reconsideration of the surrender order. If the Ontario courts had found any of these issues to have merit, they could have granted an effective remedy.
[3] Counsel has provided no sufficient reasons why the issues raised in this application for judicial review should be relitigated in the Federal Courts in an attempt to prevent Mr Schreiber’s surrender to stand trial in Germany. The fact that the Minister of Justice is not named as a respondent in this proceeding, or that the bases on which Mr Schreiber seeks to rely may constitute a “course of conduct” raising questions of Charter breaches, does not establish that Justice Phelan committed reversible error in the exercise of his discretion. The important principle of finality in the litigation process has not been abolished by the Charter.
[4] For these reasons, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.
“John M. Evans”
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-334-07
APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PHELAN DATED JUNE 11, 2007, DOCKET NO. T-389-07)
STYLE OF CAUSE: Karlheinz Schreiber v.
The Attorney General of Canada, The Solicitor General of Canada and The Commissioner of the RCMP
PLACE OF HEARING: Edmonton, AB
DATE OF HEARING: April 21, 2008
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: RICHARD, EVANS, SHARLOW, C.J., JJ.As
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: EVANS, J.A.
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Robert Hladun
FOR THE APPELLANT
Mr. James Shaw
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Hladun & Company
Edmonton, AB
FOR THE APPELLANT
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, ON
FOR THE RESPONDENT