Date: 20070522
Docket: T-128-07
Citation: 2007 FC 536
Ottawa, Ontario, May 22,
2007
PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Mactavish
BETWEEN:
PATRICE
DOUKOU
Plaintiff
and
THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY
AND
EMERGENCY
PREPAREDNESS
Defendant
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT
[1]
This
is a motion for summary judgment brought by the Defendant, the Minister of
Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. The Minister seeks an order
dismissing this action on the basis that it was commenced outside of the 90 day
limitation period provided for in section 30 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money
Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, 2000, c. 17 (“the Act”).
[2]
For
the reasons that follow, I am satisfied that there is no genuine issue for
trial with respect to Mr. Doukou’s claim, and that, therefore, his action must
be dismissed.
Background
[3]
In
order to understand the facts giving rise to this motion, it is necessary to
have some understanding of the legislative scheme provided for in the Proceeds
of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act. To assist in this
regard, the relevant provisions of the Act are attached as an appendix to this
decision.
[4]
The
essential facts giving rise to this matter are not in dispute.
[5]
On
May 12, 2006, Mr. Doukou was travelling from Toronto to
Amsterdam, en route to Accra, Ghana. He was asked by a
Customs Officer if he was carrying currency worth more than $10,000 in Canadian
funds. Mr. Doukou said that he was not, and that he was only carrying $200 in
American funds.
[6]
It
was subsequently determined that Mr. Doukou was carrying $16,500 in American
funds, or approximately $18,150 in Canadian dollars.
[7]
As
Mr. Doukou had failed to report to the Customs Officer in accordance with the
requirements of the Cross-border Currency and Monetary Instruments Reporting
Regulations, SOR/2002-412, contrary to the provisions of subsection 12(1)
of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act,
the $16,500 in U.S. funds was seized as forfeit, pursuant to section 19 of the
Act.
[8]
In
accordance with the provisions of section 25 of the Act, Mr. Doukou requested a
decision from the Minister as to whether subsection 12(1) had been
contravened. By letter dated October 13, 2006, the Minister issued a decision
in accordance with section 27 of the Act, finding that there had been a
contravention of subsection 12(1) in relation to the currency in issue.
[9]
The
Minister issued a second decision on October 13, 2006, this one under the
provisions of section 29 of the Act, confirming that the seized funds were
forfeited to Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.
[10]
Although
there was initially a dispute as to when it was that Mr. Doukou was made aware
of the decision under section 25 of the Act, at this point it is conceded by
Mr. Doukou that he was provided with a copy of the decision on October 18,
2006.
[11]
Subsection
30(1) of the Act provides a right of appeal in relation to decisions made under
section 25 of the Act. Such an appeal is to be brought by way of an action in
this Court “within 90 days after being notified of the decision”.
[12]
On
January 19, 2007, Mr. Doukou commenced an action in the Federal Court whereby
he sought to appeal the Minister’s section 25 decision. His Statement of Claim
was thus filed 93 days after he was notified of the Minister’s decision.
[13]
The
Minister now seeks an order dismissing this action on the basis that it was
commenced outside of the 90 day limitation period provided for in the Act.
Mr. Doukou’s Position
[14]
Mr.
Doukou concedes that he made a mistake in failing to declare the currency,
stating that he was unaware of his duty to declare the funds. He further
states that he lied about the amount of money that he was carrying when he was
asked by the Customs Officer, as he was in a hurry and didn’t want to be held
up. He admits that he made a mistake in this regard.
[15]
Mr.
Doukou also explained that he had difficulty retaining counsel and obtaining
documents relevant to his appeal. As I understand his submissions - not all of
which were supported by evidence - he attempted to file his Statement of Claim
prior to the expiry of the 90 day appeal period, but was not successful in
doing so until after the expiry of the limitation period.
[16]
Mr.
Doukou says that he is neither a terrorist nor a money launderer, and asks that
he be given his day in Court so as to be able to establish the provenance of
the funds in question.
Principles Governing
Summary Judgment
[17]
Summary
judgment in the Federal Court is governed, in part, by Rule 216 of the Federal
Courts Rules, SOR/98-106, the operative portions of which provide that:
|
216. (1)
Where on a motion for summary judgment the Court is satisfied that there is
no genuine issue for trial with respect to a claim or defence, the Court
shall grant summary judgment accordingly …
|
216. (1) Lorsque, par suite d’une requête en
jugement sommaire, la Cour est convaincue qu’il n’existe pas de véritable
question litigieuse quant à une déclaration ou à une défense, elle rend un jugement
sommaire en conséquence …
|
[18]
Judges
hearing motions for summary judgment can only make findings of fact or law
where the relevant evidence is available on the record, and does not involve a
serious question of fact or law which turns on the drawing of inferences: see Apotex
Inc. v. Merck & Co., [2003] 1 F.C. 242, 2002 FCA 210.
[19]
In
determining whether a case is so doubtful that it does not deserve
consideration by the trier of fact at a future trial, a motions judge must
proceed with care, as the effect of the granting of summary judgment will be to
preclude a party from presenting any evidence at trial with respect to the
issue in dispute. In other words, the unsuccessful responding party will lose
its "day in court": see Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co. (2004),
248 F.T.R. 82, 2004 FC 314 at ¶ 12, (aff’d 2004 FCA 298).
[20]
With
this understanding of the relevant principles governing motions for summary
judgment, I turn now to consider the merits of the Minister’s motion.
Analysis
[21]
Given
that there is no dispute that Mr. Doukou’s appeal was commenced out of time,
there are no relevant facts in dispute in this matter. The sole issue for
determination on this motion is whether the limitation period contained in
subsection 30(1) of the Act is absolute, or whether there is discretion in the
Court to extend the limitation period in an appropriate case.
[22]
In
this regard, the jurisprudence is clear. That is, a limitation period fixed by
statute cannot be extended by the Court unless the statute in question empowers
the Court to extend the limitation period established by Parliament: see, for
example, Dawe v. Canada (1994), 86 F.T.R. 240 (F.C.A.).
[23]
In
this case, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing
Act contains no such language.
[24]
While
Dawe was a decision under the Customs Act, the principles
articulated by the Federal Court of Appeal in that case are equally applicable
to appeals under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist
Financing Act: see Kazazian v. Canada (Solicitor General), [2004]
F.C.J. No. 1423.
[25]
Subsection
30(2) of the Act provides that the Federal Courts Act, R.S. 1985, c.
F-7, and the Federal Courts Rules apply to actions initiated under
subsection 30(1), except as varied by special rules made in respect of such
actions. While the Federal Courts Rules do permit the granting of extensions
of time, they do not authorize the Court to dispense with statutory limitation
periods: see Dawe, above, at ¶ 13.
[26]
As a
consequence, I am satisfied that Mr. Doukou’s claim is statute-barred. As
such, there is no genuine issue for trial with respect to the claim, and
summary judgment dismissing the claim is granted.
JUDGMENT
THIS COURTS ORDERS AND ADJUDGES
THAT the motion for summary judgment is granted, and this action is
dismissed, with costs.
“Anne
Mactavish”
APPENDIX
|
12. (1) Every person or entity referred to in
subsection (3) shall report to an officer, in accordance with the
regulations, the importation or exportation of currency or monetary
instruments of a value equal to or greater than the prescribed amount.
|
12. (1)
Les personnes ou entités visées au paragraphe (3) sont tenues de déclarer à
l'agent, conformément aux règlements, l'importation ou l'exportation des
espèces ou effets d'une valeur égale ou supérieure au montant réglementaire.
|
|
19. An officer may call on other persons to assist
the officer in exercising any power of search, seizure or retention that the
officer is authorized under this Part to exercise, and any person so called
on is authorized to exercise the power.
|
19. L’agent
peut requérir main-forte pour se faire assister dans l’exercice des pouvoirs
de fouille, de rétention ou de saisie que lui confère la présente partie.
Toute personne ainsi requise est autorisée à exercer ces pouvoirs.
|
|
25. A person from whom currency or monetary instruments
were seized under section 18, or the lawful owner of the currency or monetary
instruments, may within 90 days after the date of the seizure request a
decision of the Minister as to whether subsection 12(1) was contravened, by
giving notice in writing to the officer who seized the currency or monetary
instruments or to an officer at the customs office closest to the place where
the seizure took place.
|
25. La
personne entre les mains de qui ont été saisis des espèces ou effets en vertu
de l'article 18 ou leur propriétaire légitime peut, dans les quatre-vingt-dix
jours suivant la saisie, demander au ministre de décider s'il y a eu
contravention au paragraphe 12(1) en donnant un avis écrit à l'agent qui les
a saisis ou à un agent du bureau de douane le plus proche du lieu de la
saisie.
|
|
27. (1) Within 90 days after the expiry of the
period referred to in subsection 26(2), the Minister shall decide whether
subsection 12(1) was contravened.
|
27. (1)
Dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours qui suivent l’expiration du délai mentionné
au paragraphe 26(2), le ministre décide s’il y a eu contravention au
paragraphe 12(1).
|
|
(2) If charges are laid with respect to a money laundering
offence or a terrorist activity financing offence in respect of the currency
or monetary instruments seized, the Minister may defer making a decision but
shall make it in any case no later than 30 days after the conclusion of all
court proceedings in respect of those charges.
|
(2) Dans le cas où des poursuites pour infraction de
recyclage des produits de la criminalité ou pour infraction de financement
des activités terroristes ont été intentées relativement aux espèces ou
effets saisis, le ministre peut reporter la décision, mais celle-ci doit être
prise dans les trente jours suivant l'issue des poursuites.
|
|
(3) The Minister shall, without delay after making a
decision, serve on the person who requested it a written notice of the
decision together with the reasons for it.
|
(3) Le ministre signifie sans délai par
écrit à la personne qui a fait la demande un avis de la décision, motifs à
l’appui.
|
|
29. (1) If the Minister decides that subsection
12(1) was contravened, the Minister may, subject to the terms and conditions
that the Minister may determine,
|
29. (1) S’il décide qu’il y a eu
contravention au paragraphe 12(1), le ministre peut, aux conditions qu’il
fixe :
|
|
(a)
decide that the currency or monetary instruments or, subject to subsection
(2), an amount of money equal to their value on the day the Minister of
Public Works and Government Services is informed of the decision, be
returned, on payment of a penalty in the prescribed amount or without
penalty;
|
a) soit
restituer les espèces ou effets ou, sous réserve du paragraphe (2), la valeur
de ceux-ci à la date où le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services
gouvernementaux est informé de la décision, sur réception de la pénalité
réglementaire ou sans pénalité;
|
|
(b) decide that any penalty or portion of any
penalty that was paid under subsection 18(2) be remitted; or
|
b) soit
restituer tout ou partie de la pénalité versée en application du paragraphe
18(2);
|
|
(c) subject to any order made under section 33 or
34, confirm that the currency or monetary instruments are forfeited to Her
Majesty in right of Canada.
|
c) soit
confirmer la confiscation des espèces ou effets au profit de Sa Majesté du
chef du Canada, sous réserve de toute ordonnance rendue en application des
articles 33 ou 34.
|
|
The Minister of Public Works and Government Services shall
give effect to a decision of the Minister under paragraph (a) or (b)
on being informed of it.
|
Le ministre des Travaux publics et des
Services gouvernementaux, dès qu’il en est informé, prend les mesures
nécessaires à l’application des alinéas a) ou b).
|
|
(2) The total amount paid under paragraph (1)(a) shall,
if the currency or monetary instruments were sold or otherwise disposed of
under the Seized Property Management Act, not exceed the proceeds of
the sale or disposition, if any, less any costs incurred by Her Majesty in
respect of the currency or monetary instruments.
|
(2) En cas de vente ou autre forme
d’aliénation des espèces ou effets en vertu de la Loi sur l’administration
des biens saisis, le montant de la somme versée en vertu de l’alinéa (1)a)
ne peut être supérieur au produit éventuel de la vente ou de l’aliénation,
duquel sont soustraits les frais afférents exposés par Sa Majesté; à défaut
de produit de l’aliénation, aucun paiement n’est effectué.
|
|
30. (1) A person who requests a decision of the
Minister under section 27 may, within 90 days after being notified of the
decision, appeal the decision by way of an action in the Federal Court in
which the person is the plaintiff and the Minister is the defendant.
|
30. (1) La
personne qui a demandé que soit rendue une décision en vertu de l’article 27 peut,
dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la communication de cette décision,
en appeler par voie d’action à la Cour fédérale à titre de demandeur, le
ministre étant le défendeur.
|
|
(2) The Federal Courts Act and the rules made under
that Act that apply to ordinary actions apply to actions instituted under
subsection (1) except as varied by special rules made in respect of such
actions.
|
(2) La Loi sur les Cours fédérales
et les règles prises aux termes de cette loi applicables aux actions
ordinaires s'appliquent aux actions intentées en vertu du paragraphe (1),
avec les adaptations nécessaires occasionnées par les règles propres à ces
actions.
|
|
(3) The Minister of Public Works and Government Services
shall give effect to the decision of the Court on being informed of it.
|
(3) Le ministre des Travaux publics et
des Services gouvernementaux, dès qu’il en a été informé, prend les mesures
nécessaires pour donner effet à la décision de la Cour.
|
|
(4) If the currency or monetary instruments were sold or
otherwise disposed of under the Seized Property Management Act, the
total amount that can be paid under subsection (3) shall not exceed the
proceeds of the sale or disposition, if any, less any costs incurred by Her
Majesty in respect of the currency or monetary instruments.
|
(4) En cas de vente ou autre forme
d’aliénation des espèces ou effets en vertu de la Loi sur l’administration
des biens saisis, le montant de la somme qui peut être versée en vertu du
paragraphe (3) ne peut être supérieur au produit éventuel de la vente ou de
l’aliénation, duquel sont soustraits les frais afférents exposés par Sa
Majesté; à défaut de produit de l’aliénation, aucun paiement n’est effectué.
|
Email this Content