Chaaban v. Canada (Correctional Service)

Chaaban v. Canada (Correctional Service)

Court granted the extension because, applying the established four-factor test, the applicant demonstrated a continuing intention to seek review, the respondent suffered no real prejudice, the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for most of the delay (including reliance on advice and attempts to obtain...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2011 FC 1033
Parties
Applicant: Dr. Diala Chaaban; Respondent: Correctional Service Canada
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Motion for Extension of Time / Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Application for Judicial Review; Order Granting Extension
Outcome
Extension of time to file judicial review application granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, RFP Compliance, Bid Disqualification, Mandatory Requirements
Source Language
english
Administrative Law Procurement Law Federal Court Practice Extension of Time Judicial Review RFP Compliance Bid Disqualification Mandatory Requirements

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Diala Chaaban

Applicant

Correctional Service Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Motion for Extension of Time / Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Application for Judicial Review; Order Granting Extension

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant met the test for an extension of time to file a judicial review application
  2. 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated continuing intention to bring the application
  3. 3 Whether there was prejudice to the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

Court granted the extension because, applying the established four-factor test, the applicant demonstrated a continuing intention to seek review, the respondent suffered no real prejudice, the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for most of the delay (including reliance on advice and attempts to obtain recourse), and the underlying judicial review disclosed at least an arguable case due to ambiguity in the RFP about whether each Appendix B Certification required a separate signature; balancing these factors in the interest of justice warranted an extension.

Court Disposition

Extension of time to file judicial review application granted

Orders

  • Applicant granted leave to serve and file a judicial review application against the March 7, 2011 decision of Correctional Service Canada within 15 days from the date of the Order