Date: 20001010
Docket: T-623-98
MONTREAL, QUEBEC, THIS 10th DAY OF OCTOBER 2000
PRESENT: RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY
Between:
RAYMOND STEELE
Plaintiff
AND
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant
Motion on behalf of Defendant for an Order striking out the Statement of Claim on the basis that the allegations contained therein do not establish any reasonable cause of action.
[Rule 221(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998]
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY:
[1] In support of her motion the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff's Amended Statement of Claim (the Statement of Claim) filed on July 12, 2000 (by virtue of this Court's Order dated July 12, 2000) only raises a simple failure on the part of the National Parole Board of Canada (the NPB) and the Correctional Service of Canada (the CSC) to follow and apply the law, and that a mere violation of the law is not sufficient to establish liability.
[2] The Defendant asserts also that the Plaintiff's claim does not allege any fault committed by the Defendant and that the Plaintiff's damages are only and totally hypothetical.
[3] First of all, it is trite law that on a motion under rule 221(1)(a), all the facts and allegations in the statement of claim must be deemed to have been proven.
[4] Additionally, as indicated by Decary, J.A. in Sweet et al. v. Canada (1999), 249 N.R. 17, at 23:
| Statements of claim are struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause of action only in plain and obvious cases and where the court is satisfied that the case is beyond doubt (see Inuit Tapirisat of Canada and National Anti-Poverty Organization v. Canada (Attorney General), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 735">[1980] 2 S.C.R. 735; 33 N.R. 304; 115 D.L.R. (3d) 1, at 740 [S.C.R.]; Operation Dismantle Inc. et al. v. Canada et al., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 441; 59 N.R. 1; 13 C.R.R. 287; 18 D.L.R. (4th) 481; 12 Admin. L.R. 16 and Hunt v. T & N plc et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959; 117 N.R. 321; 4 C.C.L.T. (2d) 1; 43 C.P.C. (2d) 105; 49 B.C.L.R. (2d) 273; 74 D.L.R. (4th) 321). |
[5] In the case at bar, the Plaintiff's Statement of Claim might not have been drafted by the Plaintiff, a lay person and self-represented litigant, in as clear terms as the Defendant would have liked. However, I am of the view that in several paragraphs of his claim, the Plaintiff alleges, over and above a simple failure to observe the requirements of the law, some wrongful acts for which the Crown could - and I stress "could" - be held liable.
[6] As the Court understands the core of the Plaintiff's claim at this time, the latter, in his lengthy Statement of Claim, alleges that throughout the years 1992 to 1997, there has been an evident collusion between the CSC and the NPB administrative hierarchy to arbitrarily deny him earned liberties (see for instance paragraphs 23, 26.2).
[7] As for the Plaintiff's damages, I cannot conclude at this juncture that it is clear and obvious beyond doubt that paragraph 41 of the Plaintiff's Statement of Claim encompasses hypothetical damages.
[8] For the above reasons, Defendant's motion is denied, with costs in favour of the Plaintiff for a fixed amount of $350.
[9] The Defendant shall have until November 10, 2000 to serve and file an Amended Statement of Defence.
[10] Thereafter, the Plaintiff, if he so wishes, shall have until November 27, 2000 to serve and file a Response. Within the same time period, the parties shall serve and file a precise and concise proposed schedule with respect to the remaining steps to be taken in this case.
Richard Morneau
Prothonotary
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT NO.:
STYLE OF CAUSE:
T-623-98
RAYMOND STEELE
Plaintiff
AND
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant
WRITTEN MOTION EXAMINED IN MONTREAL WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER BY:Richard Morneau, Esq., Prothonotary
DATE OF REASONS FOR ORDER:October 10, 2000
WRITTEN OBSERVATIONS BY:
| Mr. Raymond Steele
|
for the Plaintiff
|
| Mr. Louis Sébastien
|
for the Defendant
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
| Mr. Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
for the Defendant
|
Email this Content