Date: 19990315
Docket: T-1662-94
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, THE 15th DAY OF MARCH 1999
PRESENT: RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY
Between:
L'ÉPINGLERIE LTÉE.
and
ARECO INC.
and
PAUL MATTE
and
STÉPHANE MATTE
Plaintiffs
AND
MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Defendant
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY:
1 On December 11, 1998, the Court issued an order which provided, inter alia, that:
[TRANSLATION]
On or before January 18, 1999, the plaintiffs must appoint a new solicitor as solicitor of record who, by the same date, must provide the Registry of this Court and counsel for the defendant with his or her address and telephone number(s).
The whole period set in the notice of status review dated September 10, 1998, will once again start to be calculated as of February 18, 1999.
2 On March 4, 1999, the instant file was again brought to my attention. In the meantime, the representation of the plaintiffs was settled. The plaintiff Paul Matte is now representing himself and has also been authorized to represent the plaintiffs L'Épinglerie Ltée. and Areco Inc. As for plaintiff Stéphane Matte, he is now represented by counsel.
3 In response to the notice of status review dated September 10, 1998, however, only the plaintiff Paul Matte filed written representations within the time limit for himself and, presumably, the corporations he represents.
4 All in all, these written representations offer an acceptable explanation as to why this file should not be dismissed for delay.
5 The representations by plaintiff Paul Matte insist at length on the merits of the plaintiffs' case. However, these representations do not propose a reasonable timetable for the prosecution of the steps to follow in the instant file in order to perfect it for the purposes of rule 258 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998.
6 Accordingly, as there are grounds to allow the plaintiff Paul Matte - for himself and the corporations he represents - the opportunity to file such a timetable.
7 As the plaintiff Stéphane Matte has also not filed such a timetable.
8 As there are also grounds to allow and encourage the defendant to file its proposed timetable for the instant file, there are grounds to order that:
-Within 20 days of the date of this order, the parties must file with the Court - jointly, if possible - a timetable of the steps to be taken henceforth in this proceeding. Any timetable proposed by the parties should be limited to those steps which are necessary and demonstrate a due regard for expeditions resolution of the matter.
Richard Morneau
Prothonotary
Certified true translation
M. Iveson
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.:
STYLE OF CAUSE:
T-1662-94
L'ÉPINGLERIE LTÉE.
and
ARECO INC.
and
PAUL MATTE
and
STÉPHANE MATTE
Plaintiffs
AND
MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Defendant
STATUS REVIEW OF THE PROCEEDING CONDUCTED AT MONTRÉAL
REASONS FOR ORDER OF RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY
DATE OF REASONS FOR ORDER:March 15, 1999
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:
| Paul Matte |
for the plaintiffs Paul Matte, L'Épinglerie Ltée. and Areco Inc. |
| Jean Lavigne |
for the defendant |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
| Leclerc Alie & Associés Noé Leclerc Brossard, Quebec |
for the plaintiff Stéphane Matte |
| Jean Lavigne Federal Department of Justice Montréal, Quebec |
for the defendant
|