IMM-279-97
B E T W E E N:
ALI TAWANAPOOR
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
GILES, A.S.P.:
On May 9th, I dismissed the applicant's first motion for an extension of time to file the applicant's record with leave to re-apply on proper evidence on or before June 1st.
At that time a further application for an extension was filed. No submissions were made with regard to the extension but the applicant's affidavit was filed which exhibited a form on which legal aid had denied assistance. The legal aid form indicated it was with respect to an application for legal aid dated May 15th, 1995. The form itself rejecting legal aid was dated February 14th, 1997, and was obviously at one time on 14 inch paper only 11 inches of which was reproduced and exhibited. The dating has possibly been explained by the applicant inadvertently in that in his affidavit at paragraph 11, he states that he filed an application for leave and for judicial review on January 21st, 1997. At paragraph 12, he swears that he applied for legal aid to cover the expenses of his appeal. The placing of the statement could be taken to indicate that he applied for legal aid after he received the decision of the Refugee Division. However, the fact remains that the applicant was unable to file his record because he delayed waiting for legal aid and has made reference to no extenuating circumstances.
The affidavit also exhibited the applicant's record which contained interalia the applicant's memorandum of law and argument in support of his leave application. As pointed out, no submissions were made by the applicant's lawyer. The Court was left to determine what the case for leave was and what the evidence was in support of it. I stated when dismissing the second application for an extension that I did not find evidence of a case.
The motion now before me is for reconsideration of my Order dismissing the second application for an extension. Both Rules 337(5)(b) and 1733 are mentioned in the Notice of Motion as grounds. Again no submissions are filed but the Notice of Motion may be intended to indicate that the matter which should have been dealt with and was overlooked was contained in the applicant's memorandum of law and argument. If that had not been noticed, it might be a ground for reconsidering the terms of the pronouncement under Rule 337(5)(b). My reasons indicate that I had read all of that material several times, so it cannot be now argued that it did not come to my attention.
Rule 1733 deals with the situation where evidence not used at the hearing is discovered or arises subsequently. There is no suggestion of any new evidence being available. Either with respect to the legal aid matter and delay generally or with respect to the existence of evidence to support an arguable case.
I have noted the argument of Counsel for the minister which which I agree and note that Rule 337(5) does not in these circumstances provide an opportunity for reconsideration. There is no allegation of new evidence which would bring Rule 1733 into play.
The Notice of Motion also sought to extend time. While Espinosa v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1992) 142 N.R.158 (Fed. C.A.) indicates that an appeal is not necessary for an extension of time and that an order extending time is always open to reconsideration even if peremptory. There must nevertheless be some additional matter to consider. Justice demands that there must be some finality to matters in litigation and there will not be multiple decisions short of appeal on exactly the same facts which would be the case if the matters of the time were to be considered on the same facts as before.
ORDER
The motion is dismissed.
"Peter A.K. Giles"
A.S.P.
Toronto, Ontario
August 20, 1997
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-279-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: ALI TAWANAPOOR
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO UNDER THE PROVISION OF RULE 324.
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: GILES, A.S.P.
DATED: AUGUST 20, 1997
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
MR. GORDON C. VADUM Q.C.
Barrister & Solicitor
14 College Street
Suite 604
Toronto, Ontario
M5G 1K2
Solicitor for the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
Solicitor for the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Court No.: IMM-279-97
Between:
ALI TAWANAPOOR
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER