Docket: T-288-14
Citation:
2014 FC 577
Vancouver, British Columbia, June 17, 2014
PRESENT: Case Management Judge Roger R. Lafrenière
|
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
JACQUES FRANÇOIS BOULET
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
|
|
Respondent
|
REASONS FOR DIRECTIONS AND DIRECTIONS
[1]
The Registry referred the Applicant’s Record, which
consists of two binders, to the Court for directions as to filing pursuant to
Rule 72 of the Federal Courts Rules. Upon noting that the document was
not in the form required by Rule 309(2), the Court instructed the Registry to
contact counsel for the Respondent to obtain the Respondent’s position
regarding the irregularities.
[2]
By letter dated June 12, 2014, counsel for the
Respondent objects to the filing of the Applicant’s Record and requests
directions regarding the deadline for service and filing of the Respondent’s
Record. The Applicant responded on June 13, 2014 that “all
letters and logic are legible and comprehensible and organized and follow the
recommendation of the rules in the categorized information and such details are
presented therein by quote of rule and process.”
[3]
For the following reasons, the Applicant’s
Record shall be rejected for filing.
[4]
First, the Applicant’s Record is premature in
that it was tendered for filing before the expiration of the time for
completion of written examinations: see paragraph 5 of the Order dated April
30, 2014. Second, the record contains numerous deficiencies that go beyond mere
irregularities. By way of example, the Applicant has failed to reproduce the
actual affidavit served on the Respondent, has moved exhibits around in different
places in his record, and has included numerous additional “exhibits” and
documents that were not previously attached to his affidavit and are not
contemplated by Rule 309(2). The material is simply too jumbled and confusing.
[5]
The Court recognizes that the Applicant is
self-represented and may or may not be adequately informed or prepared to
perfect a record. It remains that it is the Applicant’s responsibility to
familiarize himself with the procedural rules and to comply with them. As Mr. Justice
James Hugessen stated in Eric Scheuneman v Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 FCT
37, “if a [party] insists upon representing himself, he
must play by the same rules as everyone else.”
[6]
Self-represented litigants place considerable
demands and stress on Court staff and the judiciary. Such litigants often lack
knowledge about court procedures. They may also not understand the law and
legal terminology. All too frequently, the burden of ensuring that the procedural
steps to be taken by a self-represented litigant are properly performed falls
on the Registry staff or the Court itself. As a result of the need to provide
additional assistance to self-represented litigants, court resources are
diverted and stretched, resulting in increased costs and delay in dealing with
other matters. Although the problems presented by self-represented litigants
compel Court staff and the judiciary to intervene to assist, there is a limit
to what assistance may be provided. Moreover, close and individualized
attention to one party renders the system vulnerable to claims of prejudice,
favouritism and bias.
[7]
The Court has repeatedly intervened to provide
guidance to the Applicant and shown great flexibility in case managing the
proceeding, including relieving the Applicant from the application of certain
rules and extending deadlines to complete certain steps. The Court cannot,
however, assume the role of counsel and provide legal advice to a party.
Ultimately, it is the Applicant’s responsibility to prepare, serve and file a
proper record in accordance with Rule 309.
THE
COURT DIRECTS as follows:
1.
The Applicant’s Record shall be rejected for
filing and returned to the Applicant.
2.
The Applicant is granted an extension of time to
June 30, 2014 to serve and file the Applicant’s Record containing only those
documents listed in Rule 309(2), on consecutively numbered pages and in the
specific order set out in Rule 309(2).
3.
The time for service and filing of the
Respondent’s Record is extended accordingly.
“Roger R. Lafrenière”
Email this Content