Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content






Date: 20000804


Docket: T-1857-99



BETWEEN:


LEON LLOYD EAST

Applicant


-and-



THE MINISTER OF

CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


Respondent


     REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

GILES A.S.P.


[1]      A notice of status review was sent to the Applicant which indicated he was to show cause why his application should not be dismissed for delay. That means to give some reason why he did not bring matters to the hearing stage within the time allowed by the Court Rules and also to give some reason why he should be allowed to continue with his application. I would have expected such reasons and also an indication of what steps he intended to take and when he intended to take them. Instead, he has filed what amounts to a requisition for a hearing.

[2]      The last step taken before the notice of status review was sent out was the filing of the Applicant"s affidavit in support of his application on the 23rd of November, 1999. The Respondent did not file any affidavit evidence and therefore there was no one for the Plaintiff to cross-examine. The Applicant should then have filed his application record (see Rule 309). The Applicant did not do so within the time allowed. Therefore, for this matter to proceed, it would be necessary for the Applicant to bring a motion for leave to file his record late explaining why he is late and that he has a possible chance of succeeding on his application and why. However, no such motion for leave can be made until the Applicant has responded to the notice of status review and the Court has decided to allow the application to proceed.

[3]      I intend to give the Applicant until September 1st, 2000, to respond to the notice of status review and will for that purpose adjourn the completion of the status review until after that date.


ORDER

[4]      The completion of the status review herein is adjourned until after September 1st, 2000, to give the parties a further chance to respond to the notice of status review.

                                 "Peter A. K. Giles"

     A.S.P.

Toronto, Ontario

August 4, 2000

FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                         Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

                                                

COURT NO:                          T-1857-99
STYLE OF CAUSE:                      LEON LLOYD EAST

            

                             - and -
                             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                             AND IMMIGRATION

CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO PURSUANT TO RULE 369

REASONS FOR ORDER

AND ORDER BY:                      GILES A.S.P.
DATED:                          FRIDAY, AUGUST 4, 2000

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY:              Mr. Leon Lloyd East

                                 For the Applicant, on his own behalf


SOLICITORS OF RECORD:              Leon Lloyd East

                             2050 Keele Street Apt # 315

                             North York, Ontario

                             M6M 3Y7                             

                                 For the Applicant, on his own behalf

                            

                             Morris Rosenberg

                             Deputy Attorney General of Canada

                                 For the Respondent                                 


                                        




                                

                             FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA


                                 Date: 20000804

                        

          Docket: T-1857-99

                             Between:

                             LEON LLOYD EAST

            

                             - and -

                             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                             AND IMMIGRATION

                            

        

                             REASONS FOR ORDER

                             AND ORDER

                            

    

    

 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.