Aubertin v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 FCT 26

Date: 20020109

Docket: T-62-01

Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 26

BETWEEN:

RAOUL AUBERTIN

Applicant

- and -

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER

LEMIEUX J.

[1]        This is a written motion dated November 6, 2001, filed pursuant to Rule 369 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998.

[2]        This motion seeks an order pursuant to s. 18.1(2) of the Federal Court Act granting additional time for the submission and service of an application for judicial review of a decision by G.J. Loeppky, Deputy Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police ("RCMP"), served on the applicant on September 12, 2001.

[3]        The Deputy Commissioner supported the recommendation of the External Review Committee ("ERC") that he dismiss the appeal by the applicant on the merits of the allegations of scandalous conduct accepted by the arbitration committee based on a disciplinary notice against the applicant, a member of the RCMP.

[4]        However, the Deputy Commissioner dismissed the ERC's recommendation to replace the penalty of immediate dismissal by an order to resign from the RCMP within 14 days.

[5]        The precedents of this Court have established that an essential condition for an extension of time is that an applicant must show that his application for judicial review has a chance of being allowed (possible chance of success). I feel that the applicant has not met that test.

[6]        Before the ERC the applicant did not challenge allegations 8 to 13, according to which he was alleged to have:

(1)        made verifications on the CPIC system for unauthorized personal purposes;

(2)        broken the secrecy oath taken when he was hired; and

(3)        used his status as an RCMP member to obtain special or privileged treatment from counsel for the Crown, the Syndic of the Quebec Bar and the Quebec Ministère de la Sécurité publique.

[7]        The arbitration committee, the ERC and the Deputy Commissioner accepted allegations 1 to 7. These were findings of fact based on the credibility of witnesses, which is squarely within the arbitration committee's powers.

[8]        The applicant made no possible argument on the merits that would allow this Court to intervene, despite the Deputy Commissioner's discretionary decision to reject the ERC's recommendation that he be given the option of resigning. The discretionary making of that decision was not really questioned by the applicant.

[9]        For these reasons, the application for an extension is dismissed without costs.

Ottawa, Ontario

January 9, 2002

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a.

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                                                 TRIAL DIVISION

                                                          SOLICITORS OF RECORD

FILE:                                                                               T-62-01

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                     Raoul Aubertin v. Attorney General of Canada

WRITTEN MOTIONS CONSIDERED WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE

REASONS:                                                                      Reasons for Order by Lemieux J.

DATE OF REASONS:                                                  January 9, 2002

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY:

Susan Heap                                                                        FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Raymond Piché                                                                 FOR THE DEFENDANT

Paul Deschênes

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Susan Heap                                                                        FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Montréal, Quebec

Raymond Piché                                                                 FOR THE DEFENDANT

Paul Deschênes

Montréal, Quebec