CP Ships Trucking Ltd. v. Kuntze

CP Ships Trucking Ltd. v. Kuntze
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2006-01-11
Neutral citation
2006 FC 19
File numbers
T-1469-05
Decision Content
Date: 20060111
Docket: T-1469-05
Citation: 2006 FC 19
Montréal, Quebec, January 11, 2006
PRESENT: PROTHONOTARY RICHARD MORNEAU
BETWEEN:
CP SHIPS TRUCKING LTD.
(formerly known as
CAST TRANSPORT INC.)
Plaintiff
and
GUNTER M. KUNTZE
and
ENTREPRISE GUNTER M. KUNTZE & FILS INC.
Defendents
Written motion by the plaintiff to extend the deadline applicable to the service and the filing of its motion records with respect to:
a) defendant Gunter M. Kuntze’s motion to set aside and dismiss the application for judicial review; and
b) defendant Gunter M. Kuntze’s motion to strike out the name of defendent Entreprise Gunter M. Kuntze & Fils Inc. from the application for judicial review.
[Rules 8 and 369 of the Federal Courts Rules]
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] WHEREAS, for such a motion, the four criteria to be weighed are those identified as follows in Canada (Attorney General) v. Hennelly (1999), 244 N.R. 399:
1. a continuing intention to pursue his or her application;
2. that the application has some merit;
3. that no prejudice to the respondent arises from the delay; and
4. that a reasonable explanation for the delay exists.
[2] WHEREAS I find that the plaintiff has fully met the first three criteria;
[3] WHEREAS with respect to the fourth criterion, that is, the existence of a reasonable explanation for the delay, the affidavit submitted by the plaintiff in support of its motion shows that it is partly by mistake and inadvertence, possibly due to a work overload, that the plaintiff missed the deadline provided for by subsection 369(2) of the Federal Courts Rules (the Rules);
[4] WHEREAS, however, in view of all the four aforementioned criteria, it is in the interest of justice to grant plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time;
[5] WHEREAS, furthermore, on November 25, 2005, that is, after the deadline provided for by Rule 369(2), this Court nevertheless authorized the plaintiff to file this motion;
[6] FOR THESE REASONS, the Court:
GRANTS as follows the plaintiff’s motion:
The plaintiff shall file on or before January 16, 2006 the motion records served on the defendents on November 24, 2005 with respect to the following motions by the defendants:
a) defendent Gunter M. Kuntze’s motion to set aside and dismiss the application for judicial review; and
b) defendent Gunter M. Kuntze’s motion to strike out the name of defendant Entreprise Gunter M. Kuntze & Fils Inc. from the application for judicial review.
VALIDATES the service made by the plaintiff on November 24, 2005.
As to costs, notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff’s motion is granted, the Court, in its discretion, grants the defendents costs in the amount of $200.
“Richard Morneau”
Prothonotary
Certified true translation
François Brunet, LLB, BCL
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1469-05
STYLE OF CAUSE: CP SHIPS TRUCKING LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CAST TRANSPORT INC.) v. GUNTER M. KUNTZE and ENTREPRISE GUNTER M. KUNTZE & FILS INC.
WRITTEN MOTION REVIEWED IN MONTRÉAL WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Prothonotary Morneau
DATED: January 11, 2006
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY:
Hubert Larose
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
Benoît Laurin
FOR THE DEFENDENTS
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Kaufman, Laramée
Montréal, Quebec
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
Pépin et Roy
(Legal Department, CSN)
Montréal, Quebec
FOR THE DEFENDENTS