Langlois v. Canada

Langlois v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2002-11-22
Neutral citation
2002 FCA 468
File numbers
A-551-02
Decision Content
Date: 20021122
Docket: A-551-02
Neutral Citation: 2002 FCA 468
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PELLETIER
BETWEEN:
ROBERT LANGLOIS
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Written motion decided without appearance of the parties.
Order delivered in Ottawa, Ontario, on November 22, 2002.
REASONS FOR ORDER: PELLETIER J.A.
Date: 20021122
Docket: A-551-02
Neutral Citation: 2002 FCA 468
Ottawa, Ontario, November 22, 2002
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PELLETIER
BETWEEN:
ROBERT LANGLOIS
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
[1] These reasons for order deal with the notice of motion for directions filed on October 21, 2002;
[2] The notice of motion does not comply with the requirements of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106 (the Rules), for the following reasons:
(1) The name of the Court is either the Court of Appeal or the Federal Court of Appeal. The Federal Court of Canada, Appeals Section, does not exist;
(2) Rule 364 specifies that, unless the Court orders otherwise, a person bringing a motion shall serve a motion record. In this case, there is no order otherwise and no motion contemplating any such order. A party has no jurisdiction to decide itself in what circumstances it will file a motion record;
(3) An order is not a direction. Rule 54 of the Rules does not apply when the rules are unambiguous on an issue;
(4) The Court is required to determine the content of the appeal book only when the parties do not agree on its content. See Rule 343(3) of the Rules. If the respondent's counsel agrees to the order contemplated by the motion, there is nothing to prevent the parties from agreeing together, in writing, on the content of the appeal books;
(5) Rule 345 of the Rules requires that the motion record be served on the respondent and filed. The appellant has completely failed to justify any departure from the rule;
(6) Rule 346 of the Rules specifies the periods for the service and filing of the parties' memoranda. The appellant has completely failed to justify the necessity for more extended periods than those provided in the Rules.
[3] The motion will be dismissed.
"J.D. Denis Pelletier"
Judge
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, C.Tr., LL.L.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
FILE NO: A-551-02
STYLE: ROBERT LANGLOIS
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
WRITTEN MOTION EXAMINED WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PELLETIER
DATED: November 22, 2002
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:
Guy Du Pont FOR THE APPELLANT
Daniel Marecki FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP FOR THE APPELLANT
Montréal, Quebec
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario