Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19980312


Docket: T-2796-97

MONTREAL, QUEBEC, THIS 12th DAY OF MARCH 1998

PRESENT:      RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY

BETWEEN:

     ALLAN JOSEPH LÉGÈRE

     Plaintiff

     AND

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Defendant

     ORDER AND REASONS FOR ORDER

RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY


[1]      The Plaintiff's request for an oral hearing of the Defendant's motion to strike his statement of claim is denied since I am of the view that the Plaintiff has not advanced any sufficient reasons to convince me that the said motion cannot adequately be dealt with in writing.


[2]      Having said that, I have come to the conclusion that the sole remedy sought by the Plaintiff in his statement of claim filed on December 24, 1997 is an order in the nature of a mandatory injunction enjoining the Defendant to transfer him to a regular maximum security institution such as the Port-Cartier Institution.


[3]      In accordance with subsections 18(3) and 18.1(3) of the Federal Court Act, this particular remedy should have been sought by way of an application for judicial review of the latest relevant decision of the National Review Committee to keep the Plaintiff at the Special Handling Unit.


[4]      Therefore, it is plain and obvious that the Plaintiff's statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action within the meaning of paragraph 419(1)(a) of the Federal Court Rules (the rules).


[5]      This conclusion is applicable to the Plaintiff's statement of claim in its entirety and, therefore, it is appropriate to deny the Plaintiff's requests for a partial strike out of his statement of claim or for a right to file an amended statement of claim.


[6]      The Plaintiff's further alternative request for an extension of time to file an application for judicial review of the decision of the National Review Committee cannot be considered here since I do not have the authority under subsection 18.1(2) of the Act to grant such an extension of time. However, this order does not prevent per se the Plaintiff to apply to a judge of this Court for an extension of time if he considers fit to do so.


[7]      Considering that in a previous similar situation (File T-2072-94), the Plaintiff was ordered by this Court to proceed with a judicial review application instead of an action, the Plaintiff's present action is to be considered vexatious and an abuse of the process of this Court within the meaning of paragraph 419(c) and (f).


[8]      THEREFORE, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Plaintiff's statement of claim is struck under paragraphs 419(1)(a), (c) and (f), the whole with costs.


Richard Morneau

     Prothonotary

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

COURT NO.:

STYLE OF CAUSE:

T-2796-97

ALLAN JOSEPH LÉGÈRE

     Plaintiff

AND

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Defendant

WRITTEN MOTION EXAMINED IN MONTREAL WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

ORDER AND REASONS FOR ORDER BY RICHARD MORNEAU, ESQ., PROTHONOTARY

DATE OF ORDER AND REASONS FOR ORDER:March 12, 1998

WRITTEN OBSERVATIONS:

Mr. Gérald Danis for the Plaintiff

Mr. Éric Lafrenière for the Defendant

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Mr. Gérald Danis for the Plaintiff

Bourgeois & Danis

Lorraine, Quebec

Mr. George Thomson for the Defendant

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario


 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.