Date:
20070813
Docket:
A-583-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 266
[ENGLISH TRANSLATION]
Present: Pelletier J.A.
BETWEEN:
DIMITRIOS
PAPADOPOULOS
Applicant
and
COMMUNICATION, ENERGY AND
PAPERWORKS UNION OF CANADA
and CORUS ENTERTAINMENT INC
Respondents
Written motion decided without
appearance of the parties
Order
delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on August 13, 2007.
REASONS
FOR
ORDER:
PELLETIER J.A.
Date:
20070813
Docket:
A-583-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 266
Present:
Pelletier J.A.
BETWEEN:
DIMITRIOS
PAPADOPOULOS
Applicant
and
COMMUNICATION, ENERGY AND
PAPERWORKS UNION OF CANADA
and CORUS ENTERTAINMENT INC
Respondents
REASONS
FOR ORDER
PELLETIER
J.A.
[1]
This
controversy regarding the documents that must or must not appear in the
applicant’s record is caused by some confusion regarding the requirements of
the Federal Courts Rules.
[2]
The
applicant filed an application for judicial review of the decision by the
Canada Industrial Relations Board. Applications for judicial review are subject
to part V of the Federal Courts Rules. Part IV of the Rules does not
apply to applications for judicial review. See section 169 of the Rules. There
is therefore no need to file an affidavit of documents pursuant to Rule 222,
which seems to have been the applicant’s intention when he filed his affidavit.
[3]
In
the context of an application for judicial review, the function of the
applicant’s affidavit is to put forward the record as it existed before the
Court whose decision is in issue. To enable the applicant to prepare his
record, Rule 317 allows the applicant to request the transmission of materials
that are in the Court’s possession. The Court complies with this request by
transmitting the requested materials to the Court Registry and the parties
under Rule 318.
[4]
In
this case, there is a debate over which documents were in the Tribunal Record. It
is useless for the parties to be bent on exchanging motions, answers, retorts
and counter-retorts when there is probably a simple solution to the problem.
[5]
The
applicant merely has to ask the Canada Industrial Relations Board to forward
its complete and certified record to the Court Registry pursuant to Rule 318. The
issue of knowing which documents were before the Court will therefore be
permanently settled.
[6]
To
ensure that the Tribunal Record does not contain multiple copies of the same
documents, or copies of documents that were not before the Board, the parties’
affidavits and the applicant’s record will be returned to them. The applicant
will ask the Canada Industrial Relations Board to forward its certified record
to the Court and the applicant. The applicant will then prepare a new affidavit
that will submit the Board’s record as certified by the Board before the Court.
The respondent will then file its affidavit, which will not contain any
documents that do not appear in the Board’s certified record.
[7]
It
goes without saying that the applicant’s application for a direction allowing
him to file a response to the respondent’s motion record is dismissed.
“J.D.
Denis Pelletier”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-583-06
STYLE OF CAUSE:
DIMITRIOS PAPADOPOULOS
Applicant
and
COMMUNICATION, ENERGY AND
PAPERWORKS UNION OF CANADA
and CORUS ENTERTAINMENT INC.
Respondents
WRITTEN MOTION DECIDED WITHOUT
APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER: PELLETIER J.A.
DATED: August 13, 2007
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:
|
Dimitrios Papadopoulos
|
Applicant
on his own behalf
|
|
Michael
Cohen
|
For the Respondent
Communication,
Energy and Paperworks Union of Canada
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Dimitrios
Papadopoulos
Laval, Quebec
|
Applicant
on his own behalf
|
|
Melançon,
Marceau, Grenier and Sciortino
Montréal, Quebec
|
For the Respondent
Communication,
Energy and Paperworks Union of Canada
|
Email this Content