Date: 20011203
Docket: T-1883-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCT 1331
BETWEEN:
RICHARD LAMONTAGNE
Plaintiff
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
BLAIS J.
[1] This is a motion pursuant to Rule 369 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, made by the plaintiff seeking an order to claim the amount of the action, namely $50,000,000, asking that Hon. Martin Cauchon and Hon. Jean Chrétien proceed in a just manner and also asking the Court to quash any deadline and service and filing of the defendant's motion for summary judgment.
[2] It appeared from the Court record that the prothonotary Richard Morneau made an order concerning the pre-trial conference and conduct of the action, dated August 21, 2001.
[3] Under that order the defendant had until January 11, 2002 to serve and file a motion for summary judgment for all or part of the claim contained in the plaintiff's statement of claim to be dismissed in accordance with para. 2 of the order.
[4] It further appeared from the Court record that the prothonotary Richard Morneau also made an order on October 16, 2001 the purpose of which was to change the plaintiff's motion from a claim for $5,000,000 to a claim for $50,000,000, and this application was granted as there was no objection by the defendant.
[5] I have reviewed the plaintiff's motion and examined his written submissions.
[6] In para. 3 of his order of August 21, 2001 the prothonotary Richard Morneau set out the four points which must be decided when the action is heard, if it ever is.
[7] At the present time the record contains an amended statement of claim, a defence and a reply and at the pre-trial conference the prothonotary made a decision and set a deadline of January 11, 2002 for the defendant to file a motion.
[8] It appears that this deadline has not expired.
[9] At this stage the plaintiff's motion is both premature and groundless, as well as claiming that both the Prime Minister and a Minister of the Crown [TRANSLATION] "proceed in a just manner", which he states at the end of his motion is a means of demanding their resignation.
[10] This Court has no jurisdiction to respond to such a claim, which additionally is not the subject of the action at bar and does not correspond to the questions to be answered as set down by the prothonotary at the pre-trial conference.
[11] It appeared from reading the motion that the plaintiff is seeking immediate judgment from the Court pursuant to Rule 369, which is obviously premature at this stage.
O R D E R
[12] The instant motion is accordingly dismissed with costs.
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
December 3, 2001
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT No.: T-1883-00
STYLE OF CAUSE: Richard Lamontagne and Her Majesty the Queen
WRITTEN MOTION CONSIDERED IN OTTAWA WITHOUT APPEARANCE BY PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BY: BLAIS J.
DATED: DECEMBER 3, 2001
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY:
Richard Lamontagne FOR THE PLAINTIFF
Nadine Perron FOR THE DEFENDANT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE DEFENDANT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Email this Content