Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content






Date: 19991122


Docket: IMM-4406-99



BETWEEN:


YAN ZENG


Applicant


-and-



THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND

IMMIGRATION


Respondent


     REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

GILES ASP.


[1]      The applicant seeks an extension of the 30 day period limited for the filing of her affidavits. It appears a duly sworn affidavit was received by counsel in time to be filed but in a form that did not have a style of cause. Out of an abundance of caution it was probably wise to seek an affidavit in proper form at once. But in future, counsel might wish to attach a front cover page with style of cause and the legend "Affidavit of _ _ _." Such action in no way alters what has been sworn and would probably pass inspection at the Registry counter or on submission to a judge under Rule 72(1)(b). Because of the prompt action by counsel, I am extending the time for filing the applicant"s affidavit.

[2]      Counsel for the respondent asks that I provide the time for the submission of the respondent"s affidavits, cross-examinations and records. In view of the provision of Rule 78, I question whether any such order is needed. However as there are apparently no decided cases under that Rule, I will include the time limits in my order.

[3]      I also note Rule 82 which prohibits a solicitor making representations supported by his own affidavits. In addition, it is in my view improper to file as an exhibit to an affidavit a draft of the document which could not at that time be filed.


ORDER

[4]      The applicant"s affidavits may be filed on or before November 29th , 1999. The respondent"s affidavits shall be filed on or before January 18th , 2000. Cross-examination shall be completed within 20 days of the filing of the respondent"s affidavits or February 17th , 2000, whichever is first. The applicant"s record for trial shall be filed in the 20 days after the completion of cross-examinations or the time limited therefor, whichever is first. The respondent"s record shall be filed in the 20 days thereafter. The applicant shall apply for a hearing date in compliance with Rule 314.

                                 "Peter A. K. Giles"

     A.S.P.





    

    

FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                    

     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

                                                

COURT NO:                          IMM-4406-99
STYLE OF CAUSE:                      YAN ZENG

                        

                             - 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:                          MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1999

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY:              Irvin H. Sherman, Q.C.

                                 For theApplicant

                            

                            

                             Susan Nucci

                                 For theRespondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:             

                             Martinello & Associates

                             Barristers and Solicitors

                             255 Duncan Mill Road, Suite 208

                             Toronto, Ontario

                             M3B 3H9

                                 For the Applicant


                             Morris Rosenberg

                             Deputy Attorney General of Canada

                                 For the Respondent

                                            


                                                     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA


                                 Date:19991122

                        

         Docket:IMM-4406-99


                             Between:

                             YAN ZENG

Applicant

                             - and -
             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                             AND IMMIGRATION

                

     Respondent


                                            

                            

        

                             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.