Date: 19990922
Docket: A-402-98
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
MacKAY J.
McDONALD J.A.
BETWEEN:
EMILE MARGUERITA MARCUS MENNES
Appellant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, Tuesday, September 21, 1999
Judgment delivered at Toronto, Ontario on Wednesday, September 22, 1999
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: DÉCARY J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: MacKAY J.
McDONALD J.A.
Date: 19990922
Docket: A-402-98
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
MacKAY J.
McDONALD J.A.
BETWEEN:
EMILE MARGUERITA MARCUS MENNES
Appellant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DÉCARY J.A.:
[1] This appeal was heard in Toronto, in the absence of the appellant, an inmate of Warkworth penitentiary. The appellant has expressly and on his own volition asked the Court to be dispensed from attending at the hearing and to decide the appeal on the basis of his written submissions. The Court granted the appellant"s request and the appeal proceeded in the presence of counsel for the respondent. Counsel informed the Court at the hearing that she had nothing to add to her written submissions.
[2] The appellant, essentially, attacks a practice direction of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Canada whereby the appellant was refrained from placing on file any remarks insulting to the Court or to its judges and whereby the appellant was required to first submit to a prothonotary for examination any document he intended to file.
[3] The appellant filed an originating notice of motion asking for a writ of certiorari or that the direction of the Chief Justice be quashed or set aside. The respondent brought a motion to strike the proceeding on the grounds, inter alia, that a direction of the Chief Justice is not a decision of a "federal board, commission or other tribunal" and is therefore not subject to judicial review under the Federal Court Act .
[4] The Associate Chief Justice granted the respondent"s motion, and rightly so. The appellant"s proceeding was so bereft of any possibility of success as to allow the respondent to seek its dismissal through a motion to strike even though the proceeding was not an action (see David Bull Laboratories (Canada) Inc. v. Pharmacia Inc. , [1995] 1 F.C. 588 (C.A.)).
[5] In issuing directions, the Chief Justice is acting as a judge, within the Court"s inherent power to control its own process. The Court, therefore, lacks jurisdiction under section 18.1 of the Act to judicially review the Chief Justice"s direction.
[6] The appeal should be dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
"Robert Décary"
J.A.
"I agree.
W. Andrew MacKay J."
"I agree.
F.J. McDonald J.A."
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: A-402-98
| STYLE OF CAUSE: EMILE MARGUERITA MARCUS MENNES |
- and -
| ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA |
DATE OF HEARING: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1999
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
| REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: DÉCARY J.A. |
| CONCURRED IN BY: MacKAY J., McDONALD J.A. |
Delivered at Toronto, Ontario
on Wednesday, September 22, 1999
APPEARANCES: No One Appearing
Ms. Janice Rodgers
For the Respondent
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Emile Marguerita Marcus Mennes |
c/o The Warkworth Penitentiary
Campbellford, Ontario
K0L 1L0
| For the Appellant on his own behalf |
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 19990922
Docket: A-402-98
BETWEEN:
EMILE MARGUERITA MARCUS MENNES
Appellant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Email this Content