Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

PRACTICE

Pearson v. Canada

T-290-99

Muldoon J.

14/9/00

9 pp.

Dispensing with compliance--Motion for order allowing plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis based on gap rule allowing him to benefit from Ontario's civil procedure rules; right of access to this Court pursuant to common law, Charter, ss. 2, 24--Action against defendant for actions taken by employees in respect of prosecution of charges laid against plaintiff--Plaintiff unable to afford court, registry fees, costs assessed against him--Neither Federal Court Rules, 1998 nor Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure allowing in forma pauperis--Federal Court Rules, 1998, r. 55 permitting Court to dispense with compliance with any of these Rules in special circumstances--Justice, no prejudice implicit in "special circumstances": Chow v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (1998), 161 F.T.R. 156 (F.C.T.D.)--Conduct of those requesting dispensation under r. 55 will be scrutinized: Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Nu-Pharm Inc. (1996), 65 C.P.R. (3d) 493 (F.C.T.D.)--Any application of r. 55 must accord with general principles espoused by Federal Court Rules, 1998, and encapsulated in r. 3--Need for compliance with rules requiring moving party to pay any Tariff A fees in respect of this motion, main action, further proceedings dispensed with--Charter, ss. 2, 24 not applicable--S. 2 guaranteeing only person's fundamental freedoms, while s. 24 simply guaranteeing person may enforce rights in court of competent jurisdiction--Plaintiff not giving notice of constitutional argument pursuant to Federal Court Act, s. 57--S. 57 providing Act or regulation shall not be adjudged invalid, inapplicable or inoperable unless notice served on Attorney General of Canada--But not necessary to invoke s. 57--Rule of law feature of common-law jurisdictions of Canada since before adoption of Charter, as is precept of rule of law, i.e. equality of civil rights among all inhabitants--That which is by law reserved for poor people civil right, therefore available to plaintiff--Because plaintiff seeking equality of civil rights, not seeking to question constitutional validity, applicability or operability of Act of Parliament or provincial legislature--Absence of forma pauperis rule of procedure breaches rule of law, surely constituting special circumstance required by r. 55--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 3, 5, 55--Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 57 (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 19)--Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, being Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B, Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (U.K.) [R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 44], ss. 2, 24--Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.