Date: 20050317
Docket: A-663-04
Citation: 2005 FCA 105
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
SHARLOW J.A.
MALONE J.A.
BETWEEN:
MICHAEL SEIFERT
Appellant
(Defendant)
and
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
(Plaintiff)
Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on March 16, 2005.
Judgment delivered at Vancouver, British Columbia, on March 17, 2005.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: RICHARD C.J.
CONCURRED IN BY: SHARLOW J.A.
MALONE J.A.
Date: 20050317
Docket: A-663-04
Citation: 2005 FCA 105
CORAM: RICHARD C.J.
SHARLOW J.A.
MALONE J.A.
BETWEEN:
MICHAEL SEIFERT
Appellant
(Defendant)
and
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
(Plaintiff)
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
RICHARD C.J.
[1] This is an appeal from an interlocutory decision of a judge of the Federal Court dated December 7, 2004 (2004 FC 1711).
[2] The Federal Court Judge in the context of a reference under section 18 of the Citizenship Act granted the motion of the Minister to amend the Judge's previous order of July 20, 2004 providing for the taking of commission evidence from witnesses in Italy and issuing a letter of request to judicial authorities in Italy. The amendment expanded the list of witnesses for the Minister, which was not opposed by the appellant, and also provided that the commission evidence would be taken under Article 11 of the applicable treaty (The Convention between the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Italy regarding Legal Proceedings in Civil and Commercial Matters, CTS 1935, No. 14), rather than Article 12. The appellant opposed that amendment on the basis that the Article 11 procedure was prejudicial to him and is not in accordance with Rule 272(2) of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/2004-283, which reads as follows:
|
272. (1) Where an examination under rule 271 is to be made outside Canada, the Court may order the issuance of a commission under the seal of the Court, letters rogatory, a letter of request or any other document necessary for the examination in Form 272A, 272B or 272C, as the case may be.
(2) A person authorized under subsection (1) to take the examination of a witness in a jurisdiction outside Canada shall, unless the parties agree otherwise or the Court orders otherwise, take the examination in a manner that is binding on the witness under the law of that jurisdiction.
|
|
272. (1) Lorsque l'interrogatoire visé à la règle 271 doit se faire à l'étranger, la Cour peut ordonner à cette fin, selon les formules 272A, 272B ou 272C, la délivrance d'une commission rogatoire sous son sceau, de lettres rogatoires, d'une lettre de demande ou de tout autre document nécessaire.
(2) À moins que les parties n'en conviennent autrement ou que la Cour n'en ordonne autrement, la personne autorisée en vertu du paragraphe (1) à interroger un témoin dans un pays autre que le Canada procède à cet interrogatoire d'une manière qui lie le témoin selon le droit de ce pays.
|
[3] The decision under appeal is a discretionary one. The standard of review of such decisions is described as follows by Décary J.A., writing for this Court in Janssen Pharmaceutica Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (1998), 82 C.P.R. (3d) 574, at paragraph 2:
|
In order to succeed in matters such the present one, the appellants must establish that the judge has proceeded on some wrong principle of law or has seriously misapprehended the facts, or that an obvious injustice would otherwise result [citation omitted].
|
[4] The applicable provisions of the treaty are Articles 11, 12 and 13, which read as follows:
|
ARTICLE 11
(a) The evidence may also be taken, without the intervention of the authorities of the country in which it is to be taken, by a diplomatic or consular officer of the High Contracting Party for whose judicial authority the evidence is required, or by some other person named by such judicial authority.
(b) The agent appointed to take the evidence may request named individuals to appear as witnesses or to produce any document and can take all other kinds of evidence which are not contrary to the local law and shall have power to administer an oath, but he shall have no compulsory powers.
|
|
ARTICLE 11
(a) Les preuves pourront aussi être recueillies, sans l'intervention des autorités du pays où la réunion des preuves doit avoir lieu, par un agent diplomatique ou consulaire de l'autre pays, pour le compte de l'autorité judiciaire requérante, ou par toute autre personne désignée par cette autorité judiciaire.
(b) La personne chargée de recueillir les preuves pourra citer les intéressés à comparaître comme témoins ou à produire des documents; elle pourra également recueillir les preuves sous toute autre forme qui ne soit pas contraire à la législation locale et aura le droit de faire prêter serment, mais ne jouira d'aucun pouvoir coercitif.
|
|
(c) Requests to appear issued by such agent shall, unless the recipient is a subject of the High Contracting Party for whose judicial authorities the evidence is required, be drawn up in the language of the country where the evidence is to be taken, or accompanied by a translation into such language.
(d) The evidence may be taken in accordance with the procedure laid down by the law of the country in which the evidence is to be used, and the parties will have the right to be present or to be represented by barristers or solicitors of that country or by any persons competent to appear before the tribunals of either of the countries concerned.
|
|
(c) Les citations à comparaître délivrées par ladite personne devront être rédigées dans la langue du pays où la preuve doit être recueillie ou être accompagnées d'une traduction dans cette langue, à moins que le destinataire ne soit un ressortissant de la Haute Partie contractante pour l'autorité judiciaire de laquelle la preuve est demandée.
(d) La preuve pourra être recueillie selon la procédure prescrite par la législation du pays où cette preuve doit être utilisée et les parties auront le droit d'être présentes ou de se faire représenter par des avocats ou avoués de ce pays ou par toute autre personne ayant qualité pour comparaître devant les tribunaux de l'un ou de l'autre des pays intéressés.
|
|
ARTICLE 12
(a) The competent court to whom "Letters of Request" are addressed may also be requested to appoint a person to take the evidence, and on being so requested may appoint such a person. Such person may be a consular officer of the High Contracting Party for whose judicial authority the evidence is required or any other person proposed by such judicial authority.
|
|
ARTICLE 12
(a) L'autorité judiciaire compétente à laquelle est adressée la commission rogatoire pourra également être requise de désigner une personne chargée de recueillir la preuve et, une fois saisie de cette requête, de procéder à cette désignation. Cette personne pourra être un agent consulaire de la Haute Partie contractante pour l'autorité judiciaire de laquelle la preuve est demandée ou toute autre personne proposée par cette autorité judiciaire.
|
|
(b) In this case the court applied to shall take the necessary steps to secure the attendance of and giving of evidence by witnesses and other persons to be examined and the production of documents, making use, if necessary, of its compulsory powers.
(c) The person thus appointed shall have power to administer an oath, and any person giving false evidence before him shall be liable in the courts of the country where the evidence is taken to the penalties provided by the law of that country for perjury.
(d) The evidence shall be taken in accordance with the law of the country in which the evidence is to be used, provided such method is not contrary to the law of the country where the evidence is being taken, and the parties shall have the right to be present in person or be represented by barristers or solicitors of that country or by any persons who are competent to appear before the courts of either of the countries concerned.
|
|
(b) Dans ce cas, le tribunal requis prendra les mesures nécessaires pour assurer la comparution et la déposition des témoins et des autres personnes qui doivent être interrogées ainsi que la production de documents, en usant, s'il y a lieu, de ses pouvoirs coercitifs.
(c) La personne ainsi désignée aura le droit de faire prêter serment et quiconque se sera rendu coupable de faux témoignage devant cette personne pourra être puni, par les tribunaux du pays où la preuve est recueillie, des peines prévues par la législation de ce pays pour le faux serment.
(d) La preuve sera recueillie conformément à la législation du pays où elle doit être utilisée à condition que la méthode suivie ne soit pas contraire à la législation du pays où a lieu la réunion des preuves et les parties auront le droit d'être présentes ou de se faire représenter par les avocats ou avoués du premier de ces pays ou par toute autre personne ayant qualité pour comparaître devant les tribunaux de l'un ou de l'autre pays intéressé.
|
|
ARTICLE 13
The fact that an attempt to take evidence by the method laid down in Article 11 has failed owing to the refusal of any witness to appear, to give evidence, or to produce documents does not preclude an application being subsequently made in accordance with Articles 9 or 12.
|
|
ARTICLE 13
Le fait qu'une tentative de recueillir la preuve selon les modes prévues à l'article 11 a échoué par suite du refus par un témoin de comparaître, de déposer ou de produire des documents ne met pas obstacle à une requête ultérieure selon les dispositions des articles 9 ou 12.
|
[5] The Minister requested the amendment because the procedure for taking evidence under Article 11 is simpler and more expeditious. Many of the proposed witnesses are elderly or infirm. The Minister is concerned that the potential delays inherent in the Article 12 procedure would preclude some of them from giving evidence.
[6] The only substantial legal issue relates to the interpretation of Rule 272(2). The question is the meaning to be given to the phrase "binding on the witness under the law of that jurisdiction" (i.e., Italy). Article 11 grants power to the person taking the evidence in Italy to administer an oath to the witness, but does not grant the power to compel the attendance of the witness. The order in this case will require the evidence to be taken under an oath or solemn affirmation in accordance with Canadian practice. Therefore, the evidence will be taken in a manner that is presumed to be binding on the witness. That is sufficient to establish compliance with Rule 272(2). This Rule does not require that the witness be subject to the penalties for perjury in Italy.
[7] The appellant argues that he is prejudiced by the fact that the person conducting the examination in Italy under Article 11 cannot secure the attendance of witnesses. However, Article 13 of the treaty provides that in such circumstances, an application may be made to proceed under Article 12. Therefore, the fact that witness are not compellable under Article 11 can be cured.
[8] The decision under appeal discloses no error of law, and no other error that warrants the intervention of this Court. Therefore, I would dismiss this appeal with costs.
"J. Richard"
Chief Justice
"I agree.
K. Sharlow, J.A"
"I agree.
B. Malone, J.A."
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-663-04
(Appeal from Reasons for Order and Order of the Federal Court dated December 7, 2004, Docket No. T-2016-01)
STYLE OF CAUSE: Michael Seifert v. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia
DATE OF HEARING: March 16, 2005
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: RICHARD C.J.
CONCURRED IN BY: SHARLOW J.A.
MALONE J.A.
DATED: March 17, 2005
APPEARANCES:
| Mr. Douglas H. Christie
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
|
|
|
Mr. Douglas H. Christie
Barrister and Solicitor
Victoria, British Columbia
|
|
Mr. John H. Sims, Q.C.
Attorney General of Canada
Toronto, Ontario
|
|
Email this Content