Date: 20031003
Docket: IMM-6883-03
Citation: 2003 FC 1150
Toronto, Ontario, October 3rd, 2003
Present: Roger R. Lafrenière, Esquire
BETWEEN:
TAI-LANG CHUNG
PEI-HSING CHEN
CHEN-TING CHUNG
Applicants
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR DIRECTION AND DIRECTION
[1] A letter dated October 2, 2003 from counsel for the Applicants was referred to the Court for directions pursuant to Rule 72 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998. The Applicants seek directions whether they are permitted to file a Memorandum of Argument in support of their application for leave exceeding 30 pages in length. By letter dated October 2, 2003, counsel for the Respondent responds that Rule 70(1)(4) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, has no application to a Memorandum of Argument required by Rule 10(2)(e) of the Federal Court Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules. The Respondent submits that, in any event, he does not object to the Applicants' request to file a Memorandum of Argument exceeding 30 pages in length.
[2] Rule 10(2)(e) of the Federal Court Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules does not prescribe a maximum length of memoranda of argument. However, Rule 4(1) of the Federal Court Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules provides that the Federal Court Rules, 1998, and more particularly Part 3, apply to applications for leave. Rule 70, while not specifically referring to memoranda of argument, is a rule of general application. Although, on its face, Rule 70 only governs the content, format and length of memoranda filed for the purpose of applications (Rules 309(2) and 310(2)), appeals (Rule 346), and summary judgment motions (Rule 366), it has been a long-standing practice of this Court to apply a 30 page limitation on all memoranda submitted by parties, be they memoranda of fact and law, a referred to above, written representations (Rules 364(2)(e) and Rule 365(2)(d), or memoranda of argument prescribed under the Federal Court Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules.
[3] A general rule limiting the length of written submissions is clearly justified. Otherwise, the Court would be unable to control its own process, and parties would be free to submit prolix and redundant submissions that would inevitably impede the timely disposition of immigration proceedings, that are intended to be dealt with in a summary manner.
DIRECTION
Accordingly, as a general rule, a Memorandum of Argument cannot exceed 30 pages in length, unless a party has first obtained leave by motion in writing establishing special circumstances.
"Roger R. Lafrenière"
Prothonotary
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-6883-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: TAI-LANG CHUNG
PEI-HSING CHEN
CHEN-TING CHUNG
Applicants
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent
MATTER DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
REASONS FOR DIRECTION
AND DIRECTION BY: LAFRENIÈRE P.
DATED: OCTOBER 3, 2003
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:
|
Mr Marvin Moses |
FOR THE APPLICANTS |
|
Ms Marie-Louise Wcislo |
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Toronto, Ontario |
FOR THE APPLICANTS |
|
Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada |
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
FEDERAL COURT
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20031003
Docket: IMM-6883-03
BETWEEN:
TAI-LANG CHUNG
PEI-HSING CHEN
CHEN-TING CHUNG
Applicants
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR DIRECTION