Kibale v. Canada
The Court dismissed the reconsideration motion because it had already addressed the appeal's three issues (prothonotary jurisdiction, striking out for no cause of action, and refusal to grant leave to amend) and Rule 397 cannot be used to re-open or appeal the merits of that decision; therefore the motion was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2002 FCA 436
- Parties
- Appellant: Guillaume Kibale; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 8 November 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Motion for Reconsideration Under Rule 397(1)(b) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998
- Outcome
- Applicant's motion for reconsideration dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- Striking Out Statement of Claim for Disclosing No Cause of Action, Jurisdiction of Prothonotary, Leave to Amend Statement of Claim, Reconsideration Under Rule 397
- 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
Guillaume Kibale
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion for Reconsideration Under Rule 397(1)(b) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prothonotary had jurisdiction
- 2 Whether the statement of claim disclosed a cause of action and thus whether striking out was justified
- 3 Whether leave to amend the statement of claim should have been granted
Ratio Decidendi
The Court dismissed the reconsideration motion because it had already addressed the appeal's three issues (prothonotary jurisdiction, striking out for no cause of action, and refusal to grant leave to amend) and Rule 397 cannot be used to re-open or appeal the merits of that decision; therefore the motion was dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
Applicant's motion for reconsideration dismissed with costs.
Orders
- Motion dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Kibale v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-11-08 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 436 File numbers A-150-01 Decision Content Date: 20021108 Docket: A-150-01 Neutral Citation: 2002 FCA 436 Present: CHIEF JUSTICE RICHARD NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. BETWEEN: GUILLAUME KIBALE Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent Written motion decided without appearance of the parties. Order delivered in Ottawa, Ontario, on November 8, 2002. REASONS FOR ORDER: CHIEF JUSTICE RICHARD CONCURRING: NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. Date: 20021108 Docket: A-150-01 Neutral Citation: 2002 FCA 436 Present: CHIEF JUSTICE RICHARD NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. BETWEEN: GUILLAUME KIBALE Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER [1] The applicant (appellant) is asking that the Court reconsider its judgment under Rule 397(1)(b) of the Federal Court Rules, 1998 on the ground that the Court allegedly failed to deal, in its reasons dismissing his appeal, with seven questions identified in paragraph 4 of his affidavit. [2] In its judgment delivered October 4, 2002, the Court dismissed the applicant's appeal from an order of Mr. Justice Blais, who had dismissed the applicant's appeal from an order rendered by Prothonotary Aronovitch striking out his action in damages against the respondent on the ground that it disclosed no cause of action. [3] The appeal raised three issues: the jurisdiction of the prothonotary, the merits of the striking out of the statement of claim and the refusal of leave to amend the statement of claim. [4] In its reasons, the Court of Appeal dealt with these three matters. [5] What the applicant is asking is a re-examination of the merits of the Court's conclusions. However, it is settled law that the power of reconsideration under Rule 397 does not entitle the parties to an appeal. [6] For these reasons, the applicant's motion will be dismissed with costs. "J. Richard" Chief Justice "I agree. Marc Noël, J.A." "I agree. M. Nadon, J.A." Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, C.Tr., LL.L. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD FILE NO: A-150-01 STYLE: GUILLAUME KIBALE v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN WRITTEN MOTION CONSIDERED WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES REASONS FOR ORDER: Chief Justice Richard CONCURRING: Noël J.A. Nadon J.A. DATE OF REASONS: November 8, 2002 WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY: Guillaume Kibale THE APPELLANT Marie Crowley FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Guillaume Kibale THE APPELLANT Nepean, Ontario Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario