Date: 20010917
Docket: IMM-3320-01
Neutral citation: 2001 FCT 1025
Toronto, Ontario, Monday the 17th day of September, 2001.
PRESENT: Peter A.K. Giles, Esquire
Associate Senior Prothonotary
BETWEEN:
RODRIGO CASTRO
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
GILES A.S.P.:
[1] Before me are two motions. The first seeks an extension of time within which to file the Applicant's application record. The second seeks leave to file an affidavit exhibiting the Applicant's application record, presumably as evidence of the existence of an arguable case for leave. The Respondent to the second motion points out that evidence is not normally permitted in reply and that the moving parties evidence should have been filed with the Notice of Motion. I agree. In her response to the first motion, the Respondent has inter alia pointed out that no attempt was made to show an arguable case for leave, or that the record was now ready to file. Counsel also pointed out that some hitch can be expected to develop when filing is left until the last moment. This last concept is not new. I have been mentioning it since 1993 when the Federal Court Immigration Rules with their strict time limits came into force. There is however nothing but common sense which requires a party to complete his preparations before the last possible moment.
[2] The cases indicated that as well as excusing all of any delay, an Applicant must show the existence of an arguable case. I do not consider that showing an arguable case is accomplished by exhibiting an application record draft and allowing the court to find an arguable case in it, if it can.
[3] I have also in the past questioned the propriety of exhibiting the document for which leave is sought. There are occasions such as when seeking leave to file an amending pleading, when it is necessary to file the proposed amendment as the content has a bearing on the willingness of the Court to grant leave.
[4] I am not prepared to deny leave to file an Applicant's record because of a delay of possibly one day without giving the Applicant a further opportunity to show that an arguable case for leave exists. The Applicant may wish to justify the leaving of the completion of the record until the last day.
ORDER
1. The motion for leave to file a further affidavit is dismissed. The motion for an extension of time within which to file the Applicant's application record is dismissed with leave to reapply on better evidence within the next thirty (30) days.
"Peter A. K. Giles"
A.S.P.
Toronto, Ontario
September 17, 2001
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-3320-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: RODRIGO CASTRO
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, PURSUANT TO RULE 369 OF THE FEDERAL COURT RULES 1998.
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: GILES A.S.P.
DATED: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2001
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY: Mr. Ricardo Aguirre
For the Applicant
Ms. Neeta Logsetty
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Jackman, Waldman & Associates
Barristers & Solicitors
281 Eglinton Avenue East
Toronto, Ontario
M4P 1L3
For the Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General
For the Repondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20010917
Docket: IMM-3320-01
Between:
RODRIGO CASTRO
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
Email this Content