Quinn v. Deyell, 2013 SKQB 6

• Judge: Barrington-Foote, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: January 03, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2013 SKQB 6;(2013), 411 Sask.R. 250 (QB)

Quinn v. Deyell (2013), 411 Sask.R. 250 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. JA.017

Ramona June Quinn (petitioner) v. Joseph Deyell (respondent)

(2012 Q.B. No. 46; 2013 SKQB 6)

Indexed As: Quinn v. Deyell

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Estevan

Barrington-Foote, J.

January 3, 2013.

Summary:

Quinn applied, under s. 19 of the Controverted Municipal Elections Act for an order that the election of Deyell as a councillor for the Rural Municipality of Coalfields No. 4 be declared null and void, and that a new election be held as soon as practicable.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application.

Elections - Topic 8165

Controverted elections - Practice - Limitation periods - A by-election was held on March 28, 2012 - Deyell was elected councillor for the Rural Municipality of Coalfields No. 4 - Quinn (a relator) applied, under s. 19 of the Controverted Municipal Elections Act for an order that Deyell's election be declared null and void - On May 7, 2012, Whitmore, J., issued a fiat authorizing Quinn to serve notice of motion in the nature of quo warranto to determine the matter as required by s. 19(1) - On May 24, 2012, Chicoine, J., issued a fiat authorizing service of the notice of motion on Deyell - On May 25, 2012, Quinn filed her application - Service on Deyell occurred on June 8, 2012 (31 days after the fiat of Whitmore, J., and 15 days after the fiat of Chicoine, J.) - Section 23 of the Act provided that "[s]ervices of the notices of motion shall be made within two weeks from the date of the fiat granted by the judge unless otherwise ordered." - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application - The proceeding was out of time due to Quinn's failure to serve the notice of motion within the time limited by s. 23 of the Act - The court rejected Quinn's assertion that time should be calculated from the date the local registrar issued the order (May 25), as opposed to the date the fiat was granted (May 24) - The Act contained short times lines for good reason - If the date for service of a notice of motion depended on the submission of the draft order for issuance by the local registrar, those time lines could be extended at the option of the relator - That result would be inconsistent with the scheme of the Act - Further, the language of s. 23 of the Act was clear, referring as it did to "the date of the fiat granted by the judge".

Cases Noticed:

Lamb v. McLeod, [1932] 1 W.W.R. 206 (Sask. C.A.), refd to [para. 11].

Storey v. Zazelenchuk (1982), 21 Sask.R. 158 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 12].

Miller v. Boxall et al. (2006), 283 Sask.R. 257; 2006 SKQB 403, refd to. [para. 12].

Friesen et al. v. Hammel et al., [1997] B.C.T.C. Uned. 332; 47 B.C.L.R.(3d) 308 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

McLeod v. Noble (1897), 28 O.R. 528, refd to. [para. 14].

Statutes Noticed:

Controverted Municipal Elections Act, S.S. 1978, c. C-33, sect. 23 [para. 4].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Rogers, Ian MacF., The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporations (2nd Ed. 2003), pp. 144.24, 144.25 [para. 13].

Counsel:

Norma Buydens, for the petitioner;

David Hickie, for the respondent.

This application was heard by Barrington-Foote, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Estevan, who delivered the following fiat on January 3, 2013.