Sungu v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)
The appropriate course is to have the panel scheduled to hear the appeal determine whether the Court should exercise its discretion to hear the moot appeal; the pre-hearing motion to quash was not finally decided and the question is reserved to the merits panel which will receive the parties' submissions.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 FCA 225
- Parties
- Appellant: Adrien Dambana Sungu; Respondent: The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 14 July 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal (judicial Review/immigration/refugee Context) / Pre Hearing Motion to Quash on Grounds of Mootness; Motion Dealt With in Writing and Referred to Merits Panel
- Outcome
- Motion to quash not resolved at this stage; matter referred to the panel scheduled to hear the appeal to decide whether to hear the moot appeal.
- Legal Topics
- Mootness, Discretion to Hear Moot Appeals, Recurring and Evasive Issues, Pre Hearing Motions
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Adrien Dambana Sungu
Appellant
The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal (judicial Review/immigration/refugee Context) / Pre Hearing Motion to Quash on Grounds of Mootness; Motion Dealt With in Writing and Referred to Merits Panel
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal is moot
- 2 Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to hear a moot appeal
- 3 Whether the case is of a recurrent nature and evades review such that discretion should be exercised
Ratio Decidendi
The appropriate course is to have the panel scheduled to hear the appeal determine whether the Court should exercise its discretion to hear the moot appeal; the pre-hearing motion to quash was not finally decided and the question is reserved to the merits panel which will receive the parties' submissions.
Court Disposition
Motion to quash not resolved at this stage; matter referred to the panel scheduled to hear the appeal to decide whether to hear the moot appeal.
Orders
- Question whether to hear the moot appeal is to be addressed by the panel scheduled to hear the appeal.
- Order issued accordingly dated July 14, 2011.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Sungu v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2011-07-14 Neutral citation 2011 FCA 225 File numbers A-181-11 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20110714 Docket: A-181-11 Citation: 2011 FCA 225 Present: NOËL J.A. BETWEEN: ADRIEN DAMBANA SUNGU Appellant and THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Respondent Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties. Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on July 14, 2011. REASONS FOR ORDER BY: NOËL J.A. Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20110714 Docket: A-181-11 Citation: 2011 FCA 225 Present: NOËL J.A. BETWEEN: ADRIEN DAMBANA SUNGU Appellant and THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER NOËL J.A. [1] The respondent moves to quash the appeal on the basis that it has became moot and that there is no basis upon which this Court should nevertheless exercise its discretion to hear it. The appellant concedes that the appeal is moot but argues that this case is one of a category of cases that recurs frequently and is evasive of review. As such, the appellant submits that this Court shall exercise its discretion to hear it. [2] After having considered the motion’s material, I have concluded that the question whether this appeal should be heard despite its mootness should be addressed by the panel scheduled to hear the appeal which will have the benefit of the parties’ respective submissions on the substantive issue. [3] An order is issued accordingly. “Marc Noël” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-181-11 STYLE OF CAUSE: ADRIEN DAMBANA SUNGU and THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS FOR ORDER BY: NOËL J.A. DATED: July 14, 2011 WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY: Aviva Basman FOR THE APPELLANT Sharon Stewart Guthrie FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Refugee Law office Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT