IMM-976-97
B E T W E E N:
IROSLAV DISYK
a.k.a. JAROSLAW DISYK
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
GILES, A.S.P.:
Notwithstanding the statements in the affidavit filed in support of this motion for an extension. The following appears from the documents filed. The application for leave and for judicial review was filed in the Registry on March 10th, 1997.
Service of a copy of the application for leave and for judicial review was admitted by the Ministry of Justice on March 10th, 1997.
Proof of service stamped on a certified copy on the application leave and for judicial review was filed in the Registry on March 13th, 1997.
The applicant's solicitor apparently counted the 30 days for the filing of the Applicant's Record from March 13th when diarizing the requirement. The file was turned up on the penultimate of the presumed 30 days so that the Record might be filed, as appears customary with the Immigration bar, on the last possible day. The error was then discovered.
On April 25th (13 days after the error was discovered), the motion for an extension now before me was filed.
Before an extension can be granted, the applicant must first produce evidence excusing all of the delay, and second must produce evidence that facts to support an arguable case exist.
The wrong diarizing may explain the failure to file the Applicant's Record when due. If when the file was turned to on April 12th, 1997, there was thought to be time to prepare and file a record, the question arises why an application for an extension could not be prepared in the same time.
The additional delay supposedly is excused by the statement "due to unalterable time constraints was unable to complete the Applicant's Record until today's date." that date was April 24th, 1997. We do not know what the unalterable time constraints were, and the second delay is not explained or excused, nor is the relevance of preparing the Record explained. What the Court was looking for at that stage was a motion for an extension of time within which to file the Record which presumably would not be required for few days after any extension.
We do not know what the "unalterable time constraints" were, and the second delay is not explained or excused.
No representations are made as to the existence of facts to support an arguable case for leave. The motion for an extension will therefore be dismissed.
ORDER
Motion dismissed.
"Peter A.K. Giles"
A.S.P.
Toronto, Ontario
May 8, 1997
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-976-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: IROSLAV DISYK
a.k.a. JAROSLAW DISYK
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO UNDER THE PROVISION OF RULE 324.
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: GILES, A.S.P.
DATED: MAY 8, 1997
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Nestor I.L. Woychyshyn
Barrister and Solicitor
2259 Bloor Street West
Suite 301
Toronto, Ontario
M6S 1N8
Solicitor for the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Court No. IMM-976-97
Between:
IROSLAV DISYK
a.k.a. JAROSLAW DISYK
Plaintiff
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER & ORDER
Email this Content