Date: 20010817
Court File No.: IMM-180-01
Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 909
Ottawa, Ontario, this 17th day of August, 2001
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BLANCHARD
BETWEEN:
MARCOS ANTONIO FERNANDEZ, DANIEL JUAN FERNANDEZ,
ESTEFANIA DESIREE FERNANDEZ, MARCOS GERMAN RODRIGO FERNANDEZ,
MELANIE AYELEN FERNANDEZ, PRISCILA BELEN FERNANDEZ,
MARGARITA DEL CARMEN HERNANDEZ,
ANA MELVA PEREZ BARRETO DE DIAZ, DANIELA SOLANGE PEREZ
Applicants
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Nature of Proceeding
[1] The applicants brought this motion for an extension of time to move to reconsider an order dismissing the application for leave, as well as for an extension of time to file an application record.
Facts
[2] The applicants are originally from Argentina. They sought protection in Canada from persecution in Argentina due to Daniel Juan Fernandez and Marcos Antonio Fernandez's union activities which were affiliated with the Radical Civic Union Party.
[3] On December 29, 2000, the applicants were advised by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Convention Refugee Determination Division ("CRDD") that they were not Convention refugees.
[4] On January 15, 2001, the applicants filed an application for leave and judicial review of the decision of the CRDD, without the assistance of a lawyer.
[5] On April 24, 2001, the application for leave was dismissed due to failure to file an application record.
[6] On June 6, 2001, over a month after the order was pronounced and over three months after their application record was due, the applicants filed a motion for an extension of time to move to reconsider the Court order of April 24, 2001, as well as for an extension of time to file an application record.
[7] Larry Colle states in his affidavit sworn on June 6, 2001, that the applicants were unable to file an application record on time since they did not have the means to pay a lawyer and they were unable to obtain legal aid.
Issues
1. Should the Court grant an extension of time to file a motion to reconsider?
2. If the extension is granted, should the motion for reconsideration be granted?
Analysis
[8] In dismissing the application for leave, the Court rendered a final decision. It is only in the narrowest of circumstances that the Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, allow a final decision be subject to further review.
[9] Rule 397 contemplates a reconsideration because of an oversight or an accidental omission on the part of the Court. Such mistakes can be corrected at any time by the Court.
[10] I am satisfied the materials filed by the applicants do not establish that this Court has either overlooked or accidentally failed to consider any relevant material or evidence.
[11] Even if I were satisfied that an extension of time to file a motion to reconsider were warranted, which I am not, the applicants' failure to bring themselves within the limited scope for reconsideration of an order, as provided for in Rule 397 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, is sufficient to dispose of this motion.
[12] The applicants' motion will therefore be dismissed.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that:
1. The applicants' motion is dismissed.
"Edmond P. Blanchard"
Judge
Email this Content