Date: 20040527
Docket: T-1976-02
Citation: 2004 FC 776
Montréal, Quebec, the 27th day of May 2004
Present : RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY
BETWEEN:
JEAN-PIERRE LANGLOIS
Applicant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
and
CORRECTIONAL SERVICE CANADA
Respondents
Motion by the respondent to strike the applicant's application for judicial review.
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The applicant asked this Court to review the decision by the third level of Correctional Service Canada (CSC) on September 30, 2002, regarding the decision by the warden of the Donnacona Institution to suspend his visits with his spouse.
[2] The applicant twice asked the warden to review the decision to suspend visits with his spouse.
[3] It appeared that when the warden considers an application by an inmate to review the decision to suspend visits, new evidence submitted by the inmate or persons concerned in the matter is taken into account.
[4] After the applicant had made two applications for review, the warden again decided on October 24, 2002 and January 23, 2003, to suspend the applicant's visits with his spouse in view of representations by the inmate and CSC personnel.
[5] Consequently, the decision at the third level on September 30, 2002, confirming the Donnacona warden's decision on July 24, 2002, has no application at this time.
[6] It appeared from the record as it stood that the effective decision according to which the applicant's visits with his spouse were suspended is that of January 23, 2003, not that of September 30, 2002.
[7] Accordingly, whether this Court allows or dismisses the applicant's application for judicial review of the decision by the third-level decision-maker on September 30, 2002, will have no effect on the rights of the parties, since the applicant's visits with his spouse are no longer suspended pursuant to that decision.
[8] Further, it appeared that Exhibit P-3, referred to by the respondent at the hearing of the instant motion, namely the Security Intelligence Report dated July 16, 2002, is actually the basis, the key point, on which any future relevant decision affecting the applicant could be taken, not the decision of July 24, 2002, as the applicant contended.
[9] Accordingly, there is no good reason to uphold a challenge to the decision of September 30, 2002, which itself resulted from that of July 24, 2002.
[10] The applicant's application for judicial review is thus clearly moot and is consequently hereby struck out, with costs.
|
|
"Richard Morneau" |
|
|
Prothonotary |
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, C Tr, LLL
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET:
STYLE OF CAUSE:
T-1976-02
JEAN-PIERRE LANGLOIS
Applicant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
and
CORRECTIONAL SERVICE CANADA
Respondents
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec)
DATE OF HEARING: April 28, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Richard Morneau, prothonotary
DATED: May 27, 2004
APPEARANCES:
| Serge Bernier |
|
FOR THE APPLICANT |
|
|
|
|
| Sébastien Gagné |
|
FOR THE RESPONDENTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
| Bernier, Parenteau Drummondville, Quebec |
|
FOR THE APPLICANT |
|
|
|
|
| Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada |
|
FOR THE RESPONDENTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|