Schwarz Hospitality Group Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), (2002) 231 F.T.R. 1 (TD)

• Judge: Campbell, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: September 10, 2002
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2002), 231 F.T.R. 1 (TD)

Schwarz Hospitality v. Can. (A.G.) (2002), 231 F.T.R. 1 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] F.T.R. TBEd. OC.011

The Schwarz Hospitality Group Limited (applicant) v. The Attorney General of Canada (respondent)

(T-137-02; 2002 FCT 961)

Indexed As: Schwarz Hospitality Group Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General)

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Campbell, J.

September 11, 2002.

Summary:

In a judicial review proceeding, the applicant applied for leave to file two supporting affidavits after time for filing had run out.

A Prothonotary of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a decision reported at 222 F.T.R. 74, refused to grant leave to file the affidavits late. The applicant appealed.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, allowed the appeal and extended the time for filing the affidavits.

Practice - Topic 3604.7

Evidence - Affidavits - General - Time for filing - Extension of time - In a judicial review proceeding, the applicant applied for leave to file two supporting affidavits after time for filing had run out - A prothonotary refused the application respecting one of the affidavits because there was no valid reason for the delay - He stated that what was required was an "effective and valid reason" and a "substantial" reason - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that the prothonotary's decision was made in error of law - There was no case authority which placed the bar respecting the reason for delay as high as that cited by the prothonotary - See paragraphs 2 to 4.

Practice - Topic 3680

Evidence - Affidavits - Use of - Leave to offer affidavit evidence - Extension of time - [See Practice - Topic 3604.7 ].

Cases Noticed:

Canada v. Aqua-Gem Investments Ltd., [1993] 2 F.C. 425; 149 N.R. 273 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 2].

Maxim's Ltd. v. Maxim's Bakery Ltd. (1990), 37 F.T.R. 199 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 2].

Mapei Inc. v. Flextile Ltd. et al. (1995), 59 C.P.R.(3d) 211 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 2].

Counsel:

Judson E. Virtue, for the applicant;

Michele Vincent, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Macleod Dixon LLP, Calgary, Alberta, for the applicant;

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

This appeal was heard on September 10, 2002, at Calgary, Alberta, before Campbell, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who released the following reasons for order on September 11, 2002.