Date: 19990420
Docket: T-418-87
BETWEEN:
FLEXI-COIL LTD.
Plaintiff
(Defendant by Counterclaim)
- and -
F.P. BOURGAULT INDUSTRIES AIR SEEDER LTD.
Defendant
(Plaintiff by Counterclaim)
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
GILES, A.S.P.:
[1] The status review in this matter has been referred to me for disposition. This action involves two Saskatchewan implement makers who appear to have several actions in court. This action was pursued with some vigor to the discovery stage, and thereafter nothing appears on the file. The plaintiff indicates it was leaving this action in abeyance while other actions where litigated. The defendant indicates it assumed that the litigation had been discontinued since it had ceased making or selling the allegedly infringing items, and seeks dismissal of the action. There is nothing to indicate that the preference to other files was on consent.
[2] A status review is not a motion for dismissal for want of prosecution. No evidence is required or even contemplated by the Rules. It is more than probable having regard to Chin v. MEI (1993) 22 Imm.L.R. (2d) 136 and Kazi v. Kalusny (1991) 13 Imm.L.R. (2d) 158 made under the strict time limit Immigration Rules that with the new Rules mere delay will result in dismissal. However, delay in this action was substantially before the advent of the strict time limits of the new Rules. The plaintiff indicates a continuing if not demonstrated wish to proceed. I therefore conclude that the proceeding should be allowed to continue, however in so concluding, I do not preclude a motion seeking dismissal for want of prosecution if made promptly.
[3] IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
| 1. Being satisfied that this proceeding should continue, it shall continue as a specially managed proceeding; |
| 2. All discoveries shall be concluded before July 1st, 1999; |
| 3. Any notice to admit facts under Rule 255 shall be served by July 20th, 1999; and |
| 4. Any response under Rule 256 shall be served by August 9th, 1999. |
| 5. Bearing in mind that the parties are in Saskatchewan, and the business of the parties is agricultural, a pre-trial conference which must be requisitioned on or before September 10th, 1999 should be scheduled to interfere as little as possible with the harvest season. |
| 6. The foregoing is without prejudice to any motion for dismissal for want of prosecution made within the next 30 days, which motion the Registry is directed to file. |
"Peter A.K. Giles"
A.S.P.
Toronto, Ontario
April 20, 1999
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: T-418-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: FLEXI-COIL LTD. |
Plaintiff
(Defendant by Counterclaim)
- and -
| F.P. BOURGAULT INDUSTRIES AIR SEEDER LTD. |
Defendant
(Plaintiff by Counterclaim)
REASONS FOR ORDER ORDER BY: GILES, A.S.P.
CONSIDERED PURSUANT TO RULE 380 AT TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATED: TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1999
APPEARANCES: Mr. Gordon S. Clarke
For the Plaintiff
| (Defendant by Counterclaim) |
Mr. D. Phenix, Esq. and
| Mr. B Isaac, Esq. |
For the Defendants
| (Plaintiff by Counterclaim) |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Gordon S. Clarke
| Barristers & Solicitors |
| 3 Huntsmill Drive, PO Box 209 |
| Caledon East, Ontario |
| L0N 1E0 |
For the Plaintiff
| (Defendant by Counterclaim) |
| Smart & Biggar |
| Barristers & Solicitors |
| 55 Metcalfe Street, Suite 900 |
| Ottawa, Ontario |
| K1P 5Y6 |
For the Defendants
| (Plaintiff by Counterclaim) |
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19990420
Docket: T-418-87
Between:
| FLEXI-COIL LTD. |
Plaintiff
(Defendant by Counterclaim)
- and -
| F.P. BOURGAULT INDUSTRIES AIR SEEDER LTD. |
Defendant
(Plaintiff by Counterclaim)
REASONS FOR ORDER
| AND ORDER |