Date: 20011127
Docket: A-553-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 367
CORAM: STRAYER J.A.
ROTHSTEIN J.A.
EVANS J.A.
B E T W E E N:
DEAN BUCK
Appellant
-- and --
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA
Respondent
Motion dealt with without appearance at Ottawa, Ontario
JUDGMENT delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, Tuesday, November 27, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: STRAYER J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
EVANS J.A.
Date: 20011127
Docket: A-553-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 367
C O R A M: STRAYER J.A.
ROTHSTEIN J.A.
EVANS J.A.
B E T W E E N:
DEAN BUCK
Appellant
-- and --
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
STRAYER J.A.
[1] The original action which gave rise to an appeal to this Court was commenced in March, 1995. After many years of delay a show cause order was issued in the Trial Division requiring the appellant to show why the action should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. As a result, Hugessen J. on August 17, 2000, did dismiss it, stating in part that "The plain fact is that the plaintiff has not respected any deadline set by the Court and has been alone responsible for the significant delays which have occurred since the first pre-trial conference in 1997."
[2] The appellant filed a notice of appeal from that decision in this Court on September 18, 2000. An appeal book was prepared and filed and memoranda of fact and law were exchanged, although the appellant was several weeks late in filing his memorandum on February 11, 2001. That appears to be the last step he took in the appeal until the Court issued an order on August 16, 2001 requiring him to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for delay.
[3] As a result the appellant proposed to file, not a reply to show such cause, but a defective motion for an extension of time to file a Requisition for Hearing. This was rejected for its defects and the appellant filed a revised motion on October 24, 2001 which was accepted for filing. In response to the motion to extend the time to file a Requisition, the respondent objected to such an extension and brought a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. In response to this motion the appellant simply refiled its earlier motion material which sought to justify an extension of time for filing a Requisition, adding brief written representations.
[4] The appellant has nowhere responded directly to the show cause order of August 16, 2000. His only justification for the delay in filing a Requisition is a recitation in an affidavit deposed by his "legal agent", Mr. Harry Kopyto, who attributes the delay to his own "inadvertance", which inadvertence, it seems, arose from him not having consulted the Rules of the Court and "the legal work which I do is almost exclusively in respect of services performed in the Provincial Court [sic]". One might be more sympathetic to this appellant for the "inadvertance"of this particular "legal agent" were it not for the evidence on record of a history of delays and failures to appear on the part of the appellant and his various legal representatives throughout the history of this action and appeal.
[5] I am therefore of the view that this appellant's motion for an extension of time should be dismissed, and the motion of the respondent to dismiss the appeal for delay should be granted with costs to the respondent.
(s) "B.L. Strayer"
J.A.
I agree
Marshall Rothstein J.A.
I agree
John M. Evans J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-553-00
STYLE OF CAUSE: DEAN BUCK
-and-
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
IN RIGHT OF CANADA
MOTION DEALT WITH ON RECORD
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: Strayer J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: Rothstein J.A.
Evans J.A.
DATED: November 27, 2001
REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY:
Mr. James E.R. Gray FOR THE APPELLANT
Mr. Dean Buck ON HIS OWN BEHALF
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Morris Rosenberg FOR THE APPELLANT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
Mr. Dean Buck ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Toronto, Ontario
Email this Content