Date: 20031120
Docket: A-51-03
Citation: 2003 FCA 439
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
EVANS J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
BETWEEN:
ERIC SCHEUNEMAN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 19, 2003.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 20, 2003.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: EVANS J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: RICHARD C.J.
PELLETIER J.A.
Date: 20031120
Docket: A-51-03
Citation: 2003 FCA 439
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
EVANS J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
BETWEEN:
ERIC SCHEUNEMAN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
EVANS J.A.
[1] This is an appeal by Eric Scheuneman from an order of Blanchard J., dated January 16, 2003, in Court file T-1256-02. In this order, Blanchard J. dismissed an appeal from an order of Aronovich P., dated November 21, 2002, striking out Mr. Scheuneman's statement of claim as disclosing no reasonable cause of action and an abuse of the process of the Court.
[2] The Crown's motion to strike had been brought in Mr. Scheuneman's action for a declaration that rules 119, 120 and 121 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998 are unconstitutional in that they do not provide for a litigant to be represented by a person who is not a lawyer. Mr. Scheuneman says that his physical disabilities prevent him from adequately representing himself in an oral hearing, and that he cannot afford to retain a lawyer and is not able to obtain legal aid.
[3] Mr. Scheuneman has, and has had, several matters before the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal arising from the termination of his employment in the federal public service and the discontinuation of his disability benefits.
[4] Mr. Scheuneman's action is misconceived. It lacks any factual foundation and asks for a declaration of invalidity in the abstract. His apparent wish to be represented in his ongoing litigation in the Federal Court by a person who is not a lawyer is more appropriately raised in the context of a particular matter in which he has been refused leave to be represented by a particular person because of rule 119.
[5] The Court may well have an inherent discretion, exercisable in unusual circumstances, to permit a person other than a lawyer to represent a litigant when the interests of justice so require: Erdmann v. Canada, 2001 FCA 138 at para. 11. However, if it exists, this residual discretion can only properly be exercised in the context of specific facts, including the suitability of the person who has agreed, at Mr. Scheuneman's request, to represent him.
[6] For these reasons, I would dismiss the appeal.
"John M. Evans"
J.A.
"I agree
J. Richard, C.J."
"I agree
J.D. Denis Pelletier, J.A."
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-51-03
APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA DATED JANUARY 16, 2003, FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA FILE NO. T-1256-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: ERIC SCHEUNEMAN v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: November 19, 2003
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: Evans, J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: Richard, C.J.
Pelletier, J.A.
DATED: November 20, 2003
APPEARANCES
Mr. Eric Scheuneman Appellant on his own behalf
Ms. Marie Crowley for the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Eric Scheuneman Appellant on his own behalf
Maberly, Ontario
Mr. Morris Rosenberg for the Respondent
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Email this Content