Date: 20100630
Docket: 10-A-18
Citation: 2010 FCA
175
Present: NOËL J.A.
BETWEEN:
DON IRVINE, DARREN KING, RHONDA KING,
KARI LAFOND,
DON POOYAK and PHYLLIS LENNIE
Applicants
and
THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Dealt with in writing without appearance
of parties.
Order delivered at Ottawa,
Ontario,
on June 30, 2010.
REASONS
FOR ORDER BY: NOËL
J.A.
Date: 20100630
Docket: 10-A-18
Citation: 2010 FCA 175
Present: NOËL
J.A.
BETWEEN:
DON IRVINE, DARREN KING, RHONDA KING,
KARI LAFOND,
DON POOYAK and PHYLLIS LENNIE
Applicants
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
NOËL J.A.
[1]
The
applicants bring an application pursuant to Rule 369 of the Federal Courts
Rules, SOR/98-106 (the Rules), seeking an extension of time to commence applications
for judicial review of the January 9, 2009 and November 25, 2009 decisions of
the Honourable R.J. Marin, Umpire.
[2]
Each of
the applicants were appellants before the Umpire, the appeal by Don Irvine
being considered as the lead appeal (the lead applicant).
[3]
By a
previous application before this Court, A-94-09, the lead applicant sought
judicial review of the January 9, 2009 Umpire decision. This application was
dismissed on October 29, 2009 to allow the lead applicant to pursue an
application to have the January 9, 2009 decision reconsidered by the Umpire on
the basis of new facts, pursuant to section 120 of the Employment Insurance
Act, S.C. 1996, c. 23 (section 120). The application for reconsideration
was dismissed by the Umpire on November 25, 2009.
[4]
The
applicants now request an extension of time to commence an application for
judicial review of both the Umpire’s original January 9, 2009 decision and the
November 25, 2009 section 120 decision.
[5]
As noted,
the application for judicial review of the original Umpire decision was
dismissed by this Court. It follows that the only Umpire decision that can be
judicially reviewed at this time is the Umpire reconsideration decision of
November 25, 2009.
[6]
The
respondent resists the application for an extension of time to judicially review
the decision of November 25, 2009 on the basis that the applicant has not
disclosed an arguable case.
[7]
I am not satisfied
that the application for an extension of time can be dismissed on this basis at
this stage. Accordingly the applicants will be granted an extension of time
until July 30, 2010 to
file fresh applications for judicial review in their
respective names directed against the decision of November 25, 2009 only.
“Marc
Noël”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: 10-A-18
STYLE OF CAUSE: DON
IRVINE, DARREN KING, RHONDA KING,
KARI LAFOND, DON POOYAK and PHYLLIS LENNIE v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
MOTION
DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Noël J.A.
DATED: June 30, 2010
WRITTEN
REPRESENTATIONS BY:
|
Don Irvine
|
SELF-REPRESENTED
|
|
François Choquette
|
FOR
THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
|
Myles J. Kirvan
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR
THE RESPONDENT
|
Email this Content