Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20020916

Docket: IMM-5208-01

Neutral Citation: 2002 FCT 978

Ottawa, Ontario, September16, 2002

Present:         The Honourable Mr. Justice Blais

BETWEEN:

                                                      N'CHO SIMEON N'TAKPE

                                                                                                                                          Applicant

                                                                           and

                                  MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                           REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

[1]                Following an order dated August 15, 2002, requiring the presence of Claude Whalen, counsel for the applicant, Claude Whalen appeared before the Court on September 3, 2002, at 9:00 a.m.

[2]                When asked to explain his conduct in this matter, Claude Whalen confirmed the following facts:

a)          He has been working for the last several months at the Immigration and Refugee Board;


b)          When he decided to accept this new challenge at the Immigration and Refugee Board, he knew that he could not represent individuals on applications for judicial review of decisions made by the Immigration and Refugee Board;

c)          He made arrangements to withdraw from files that he had pending before the Immigration and Refugee Board, but he was unable to do so in this file because he could not find his client;

d)          He says that he decided to continue with this file in order to preserve his client's interests;

e)          He is aware that he was in a conflict of interest but he has deliberately not withdrawn from the file.

[3]                Mr. Whalen could easily have obtained leave to withdraw from the file by explaining that he could no longer find his client, and moreover, that his new duties at the Immigration and Refugee Board put him in a conflict of interest; the latter provided even greater justification for him to cease acting for the applicant.

[4]                Mr. Whalen was completely aware of the situation, but he intentionally decided to keep his name on the record and to ask that the Court render its decision on the strength of the file.


[5]                It is quite clear that, for Mr. Whalen, the fact of not appearing before the Court does not alter whatsoever the fact that he remains solicitor of record, and that the presumption established by Rule 123 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998 applies. Whether or not he is physically present before the Court has nothing to do with representation in the file, because other rules of the Court, in particular Rules 369 and following, provide that motions may be decided on the basis of written representations.

[6]                Moreover, Mr. Whalen did not provide any explanation for his absence on the day of the hearing, August 14, 2002.

[7]                I have no hesitation in finding that the explanations provided by Mr. Whalen are completely inadequate in the circumstances.

[8]                I also continue to be troubled by the fact that Mr. Whalen seems to consider that his attitude and his behaviour in this matter appear completely reasonable.

[9]                In my view, the fact that Mr.Whalen put himself in a conflict of interest and did not take immediate steps to put an end to this conflict of interest constitutes serious professional misconduct.

[10]            In addition, Mr. Whalen failed to appear before the Court, in the hope that the matter would resolve itself, which, in my opinion, also constitutes misconduct because he is not acting in the best interests of his clients.

[11]            Clearly, I do not have the power to assess Mr. Whalen's competence in refugee law, since he did not appear before me to represent his client. However, the cavalier manner in which he is disregarding the rules of professional conduct and the rules governing conflict of interest fully justify the following conclusions.


[12]            Mr. Whalen's behaviour is appalling in the circumstances, and it is completely justified that he be ordered to pay costs fixed in the amount of $1,000 as a result of his conduct in this matter. Moreover, I believe it is important and essential that a copy of this order be sent to the Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board and to the president of the Barreau du Québec for their information.                 

                                                                       ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

-            Claude Whalen be ordered to personally pay costs of $1000 as a result of his conduct in this matter;

-            a copy of the order and the reasons as well as a copy of the transcript be sent to the Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board and to the president of the Barreau du Québec.

Pierre Blais                                          

Judge

Certified true translation

Mary Jo Egan, LLB


                                                 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA                                                 

                                                                TRIAL DIVISION

                            NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                    IMM-5208-01

STYLE OF CAUSE:                   N'CHO SIMEON N'TAKPE v. MCI

PLACE OF HEARING:              Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                 September 3, 2002

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BLAIS

DATED:                                       September16, 2002

APPEARANCES:

Claude Whalen                                                           FOR THE APPLICANT

Steve Bell                                                                    FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Claude Whalen                                                           FOR THE APPLICANT

Montréal, Quebec

Morris Rosenberg                                                      FOR THE RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.