Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20030214

Docket: A-564-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 81

PRESENT:      NOËL J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             ISTVAN SZEBENYI JR.

GIZELLA SZEBENYI

                                                                                                                                                      Applicants

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                           Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties.

                                   Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on February 14, 2003.

REASONS FOR ORDER BY:                                                                                                   NOËL J.A.


Date: 20030214

Docket: A-564-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 81

PRESENT:      NOËL J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                             ISTVAN SZEBENYI JR.

GIZELLA SZEBENYI

                                                                                                                                                      Applicants

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

NOËL J.A.

[1]                 This is a motion brought pursuant to Rule 369 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998 for this Court to determine the content of the appeal book.

[2]                 The parties have failed to reach an agreement on whether to include the following documents:

a)      Order of Gibson J. dated June 3, 1998 (IMM-939-98);


b)      Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière, dated August 18, 2000;

c)      Order of Blais J., dated September 19, 2000 (IMM-739-98);

d)      Order of Blais J., dated November 2, 2000 (IMM-739-98);

e)      Order of Blais J., dated December 8, 2000 (IMM-739-98);

f)       Order of Linden J.A., Sharlow J.A., Malone J.A., dated September 20, 2001 (A-787-00);

g)      Judgement and Order of The Honourable Madame L'Heureux-Dubé, The Honourable Mr. Justice Bastarache and The Honourable Mr. Justice Binnie dated May 23, 2002 (SCC-28902);

h)      Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière, dated July 24, 2002;

i)       Order of Beaudry J., dated August 19, 2002;

j)       Order of Martineau, J. dated September 27, 2002;

k)      Order of Beaudry J., dated October 2, 2002;

l)       Decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board (Appeal division), dated November 28, 2001 (TAO-12942);

m)     letter dated August 8, 2002;

n)      letter dated August 19, 2002 and bill of costs for $1,013.85;

o)      letter dated September 11, 2002.

[3]                 Rule 343(2) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998 sets out that only documents which are required to dispose of an appeal ought to be included in an appeal book.

[4]                 The issue to be determined on this appeal is whether Beaudry J. erred in his refusal to reconsider (in his Order of October 2, 2002) his original refusal (in his Order of August 19, 2002) to overturn Prothonotary Lafrenière's denial to allow the applicant Istvan Szebenyi Jr. to represent his mother.


[5]                 The decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board - referred to above at paragraph 2 l) - dealt with an entirely different issue, namely the applicant's appeal of a denial of sponsorship. As such, it is not relevant to the disposition of the narrow issue raised on this appeal and ought not be included in the appeal book.

[6]                 On the other hand, the orders - referred to above in paragraph 2a)-k) - are relevant inasmuch as they all dealt with the issue of whether the applicant should be allowed to represent his mother. Therefore, all of these orders ought to be included in the appeal book. Similarly, the letters pertaining to the respondent's attempts to obtain payment of costs awarded in other proceedings - referred to above in paragraph 2 m), n) and o) - may be relevant to an order as to costs if the respondent is successful in resisting the appeal.

[7]                 The appeal book will therefore comprise the following documents:

            a)      Order of Gibson J. dated June 3, 1998 (IMM-939-98);

            b)      Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière, dated August 18, 2000;

            c)      Order of Blais J., dated September 19, 2000 (IMM-739-98);

            d)      Order of Blais J., dated November 2, 2000 (IMM-739-98);

            e)      Order of Blais J., dated December 8, 2000 (IMM-739-98);

            f)       Order of Linden J.A., Sharlow J.A., Malone J.A., dated September 20, 2001 (A-787-00);

            g)      Judgement and Order of The Honourable Madame L'Heureux-Dubé, The Honourable Mr. Justice Bastarache and The Honourable Mr. Justice Binnie dated May 23, 2002 (SCC-28902);

            h)      Order of Prothonotary Lafrenière, dated July 24, 2002;


            i)       Order of Beaudry J., dated August 19, 2002;

            j)       Order of Martineau, J. dated September 27, 2002;

            k)      Order of Beaudry J., dated October 2, 2002;

            l)       letter dated August 8, 2002;

            m)     letter dated August 19, 2002 and bill of costs for $1,013.85;

            n)      letter dated September 11, 2002.

[8]                 Excluded therefrom is the decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board (Appeal division), dated November 28, 2001 (TAO-12942).

[9]                 An order is issued accordingly.

   

                   "Marc Noël"                   

J.A.


FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:A-564-02

STYLE OF CAUSE:Istvan Szebenyi Jr. et al. v. Her Majesty the Queen

DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

REASONS FOR ORDER BY: NOËL J.A.

DATED:February 14, 2003

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:

Istvan Szebenyi Jr.APPLICANTS

Gizella Szebenyi

Marcel LaroucheFOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Istvan Szebenyi Jr.APPLICANTS

Gizella Szebenyi

Oshawa, Ontario

Morris RosenbergFOR THE RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

 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.