Morin v. Canada, 2003 FCA 72

                                                                                                                                            Date: 20030210

                                                                                                                                        Docket: A-383-00

                                                                                                                  Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 72

CORAM:        STRAYER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                      JEANNINE MORIN, personally, and on behalf of a class of persons

                     having the same interest, which class is more particularly described in

                                               Appendix "A", of the Statement of Claim

                                                                                                                                                     Appellants

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

STRAYER J.A.

[1]                 The appellant seeks yet another extension of time for perfecting the appeal.

[2]                 This appeal was filed on July 27, 2000. No further steps having been taken, a notice of status review was issued on February 26, 2001. As a result the Court decided not to dismiss the appeal at that time but gave counsel until August 31, 2001 to state which steps were being taken. Counsel advised on that date that the appellant was awaiting funding of her case by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. No further steps were taken by the appellant in the appeal. On April 3, 2002 the Court directed counsel for the appellant to advise the Court on or before April 30, 2002 as to what steps would be taken so that the appeal can proceed. On April 30, 2002 counsel for the appellant advised the Court that "funding . . . is now in place". He also said that he would be preparing a joint book of authorities, a notice of a constitutional question, and make a motion for an expedited appeal, all before May 15, 2002. The Court file does not indicate that any of these steps were taken. Starting in October, 2002 counsel for the appellant then got extensions of time for further action to November 15, 2002, to December 27, 2002 (on consent) and to January 24, 2003 (on consent). To date no other step has been taken to advance this appeal. Instead the appellant submitted a notice on January 20, 2003 that she intends to act for herself in place of her solicitor of record and requested a further three months delay.

[3]                 This appeal could and should be dismissed because the appellant has not complied with the terms imposed as a result of the status review. Over 2½ years have elapsed and the only step that has ever been taken by the appellant or her counsel has been the filing of a notice of appeal. Having regard to the most recent request by the appellant for a further delay of three months so that she can find new counsel, however, I will refrain from dismissing the appeal at this time to give the appellant an opportunity to demonstrate that she and new counsel can advance the appeal more quickly than she was able to with her previous counsel. However further delays will amount to abuse of the process of the Court and will not be accepted. The appellant will have until May 2, 2003 to file and serve an appeal book. If the parties are unable to agree on the contents of an appeal book then the appellant shall serve and file a notice of motion for a determination of the contents of the appeal book under rule 343, and when that order is issued it will fix the date for filing and serving the appeal book.

[4]                 If this order is not complied with the Court will consider dismissal of the appeal without further notice to the parties. The appellant is advised to show this order to new counsel, if she finds one, so that counsel will understand the conditions under which he or she is accepting this appeal. The Court will not entertain a request for further delay on the grounds that there is new counsel unfamiliar with the file.

[5]                 The appellant should also be aware that her notice of acting in person should be served on counsel for the respondent.

  

                                                                                                                                          (s) "B.L. Strayer"          

J.A.

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

    

DOCKET:                                             A-383-00

  

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           JEANNINE MORIN, personally, and on behalf of a class of persons having the same interest, which class is more particularly described in Appendix "A", of the Statement of Claim and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE STRAYER

  

DATED:                                                February 10, 2003

   

SUBMISSIONS IN WRITING BY:

Jeannine Morin                                                                               FOR THE APPELLANT

Gary N. Penner                                                                              FOR THE RESPONDENT

  

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Jeannine Morin

North Bay, Ontario                                                                         FOR THE APPELLANT

   

Gary N. Penner

Department of Justice

Toronto, Ontario                                                                            FOR THE RESPONDENT