Figueroa v. Canada (Foreign Affairs Trade and Development)

Figueroa v. Canada (Foreign Affairs Trade and Development)

The Motion judge did not err because Rule 397 permits only narrow reconsideration and cannot be used to obtain appellate review; accordingly the appeal from the dismissal of the Rule 397 motion is dismissed and the earlier decision stands.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2017 FCA 58
Parties
Appellant: Jose Luis Figueroa; Respondent: The Minister of Foreign Affairs Trade and Development
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Mandamus Application / Appeal From Dismissal of Rule 397 Reconsideration Motion to Federal Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Mandamus, Reconsideration Under Rule 397, Certification Under Regulations Implementing the United Nations Resolutions on the Suppression of Terrorism, Costs
Source Language
en
Administrative Law Judicial Review Federal Courts Procedure International Sanctions Mandamus Reconsideration Under Rule 397 Certification Under Regulations Implementing the United Nations Resolutions on the Suppression of Terrorism Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jose Luis Figueroa

Appellant

The Minister of Foreign Affairs Trade and Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Mandamus Application / Appeal From Dismissal of Rule 397 Reconsideration Motion to Federal Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the motion judge erred in refusing to reconsider under Rule 397 of the Federal Courts Rules
  2. 2 Whether a motion for reconsideration under Rule 397 can be treated as an appeal
  3. 3 Whether mandamus relief should compel the Minister to process a section 10 certification request under the Regulations Implementing the United Nations Resolutions on the Suppression of Terrorism

Ratio Decidendi

The Motion judge did not err because Rule 397 permits only narrow reconsideration and cannot be used to obtain appellate review; accordingly the appeal from the dismissal of the Rule 397 motion is dismissed and the earlier decision stands.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to respondent fixed at $2,500 inclusive of disbursements