Byer v. Canada

Byer v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-02-12 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 65 File numbers A-107-03 Decision Content Date: 20040212 Docket: A-107-03 Citation: 2004 FCA 65 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. DÉCARY J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: STEPHEN M. BYER Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on February 11, 2004. Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on February 12, 2004. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Date: 20040212 Docket: A-107-03 Citation: 2004 FCA 65 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. DÉCARY J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: STEPHEN M. BYER Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT [1] This is an appeal from a decision of Pinard J. granting the respondent's motion for summary judgment and dismissing the appellant's action on the basis that it was time-barred (2003 FCT 67). [2] There is little to be added, in our view, to the reasons of the learned judge. The appellant is mistaken in his belief that his claim is one of malicious prosecution against the Crown in Right of Canada. The Crown is not the prosecutor in the penal proceedings taken against the appellant by the Bar of Montreal in the Court of Quebec. The appellant's claim, as appears from paragraph 24 of his Amended Statement of Claim, is one of conspiracy by the agents of the Crown to have him charged and prosecuted by somebody other than the Crown. [3] The appellant is also mistaken in his belief that the mere existence of the constitutional issues he raises is a bar to the application of the time limits. These issues are being raised in the context of his claim of conspiracy; they do not have a life of their own; should that claim be time-barred, as we find it is, the constitutional issues simply die with it. [4] Finally, the appellant alleges that a transaction has occurred with respect to the complaint filed in the Court of Quebec and that, as a result, the prescription of his claim in the Federal Court of Canada has been interrupted (article 2896 of the Quebec Civil Code). The document filed by the appellant is undated and unsigned and, in any event, would not come within the meaning of article 2896 because it pertains to a judicial demand other than the one contemplated by that article. Article 2896 is of no assistance where the judicial demand it refers to is already time-barred. [5] The appeal should be dismissed with costs. "J. Richard" Chief Justice "Robert Décary" J.A. "K. Sharlow" J.A . FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-107-03 STYLE OF CAUSE: STEPHEN M. BYER v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA DATED JANUARY 23, 2003, FILE NO. T-230-02 PLACE OF HEARING: OTTAWA, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 11, 2004 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: RICHARD C.J., DÉCARY J.A., SHARLOW J.A. DATED: FEBRUARY 12, 2004 APPEARANCES: Mr. Stephen M. Byer ON HIS OWN BEHALF Mr. Daniel Latulippe FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mr. Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT