Lewis v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), (2001) 206 F.T.R. 313 (TD)

• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: June 19, 2001
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2001), 206 F.T.R. 313 (TD)

Lewis v. Can. (M.C.I.) (2001), 206 F.T.R. 313 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.015

Leacroft Antonio Lewis (applicant) v. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (respondent)

(IMM-1114-01; 2001 FCT 676)

Indexed As: Lewis v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Hargrave, Prothonotary

June 19, 2001.

Summary:

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration determined that Lewis constituted a danger to the public in Canada (Immigration Act, s. 70(5)). Lewis applied for leave and for judicial review of the Minister's decision. Lewis moved for an extension of time within which to file an affidavit of service of the application for leave and for judicial review and to extend time to serve and file the record.

A Prothonotary of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the motion.

Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1

Judicial review - General - Practice - Limitation period - Extension of - The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration determined that Lewis constituted a danger to the public in Canada (Immigration Act, s. 70(5)) - On March 6, 2001, Lewis applied for leave and for judicial review of the Minister's decision - On May 22, 2001, Lewis moved for an extension of time within which to file an affidavit of service and to serve and file the record - The only explanation offered was that the filing times were inadvertently missed due to a staff shortage and heavy workload - A Prothonotary of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the motion - Heavy workload was not an acceptable excuse and, without more, a mere reference to a staff shortage was insufficient because it did not invoke the concept of an unexpected event beyond the control of Lewis or his counsel - The material filed on behalf of Lewis also contained no reference to the worth of the case, other than a brief argument based on compassion, which had no inherent weight when it came to the merits of the case.

Aliens - Topic 4064

Practice - Judicial review and appeals - Judicial review - Time for (incl. extension of) - [See Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1 ].

Aliens - Topic 4064.1

Practice - Judicial review and appeals - Extension of time to file record - [See Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1 ].

Courts - Topic 4072

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction - Trial Division - Practice - Extension of time or limitation periods - [See Administrative Law - Topic 3342.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

Grewal v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 2 F.C. 263; 63 N.R. 106 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Beilin et al. v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1994), 88 F.T.R. 132 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 6].

Chin v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 69 F.T.R. 77 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 7].

Brown v. Canada (Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'Immigration) (1996), 128 F.T.R. 3 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 8].

Consumers' Association of Canada et al. v. Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario et al. (No. 3), [1974] 1 F.C. 460; 2 N.R. 462 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Aguiar v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (1995), 106 F.T.R. 304 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 9].

Counsel:

Morris Lyons, Q.C. (by way of Rule 369 Motion in Writing), for the applicant;

W. Brad Hardstaff (by way of Rule 369 Motion in Writing), for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Lyons Albert & Cook, Edmonton, Alberta, for the applicant;

Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This motion was dealt with on the basis of written submissions by Hargrave, Prothonotary, of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on June 19, 2001.