PRACTICE |
Variation of Time |
Kazakian v. Canada (Solicitor General)
04-T-39
2004 FC 1177, Morneau P.
25/8/04
4 pp.
Pursuant to Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, s. 30(1) (Act), applicant had 90 days to appeal decision by defendant under Act, s. 25--Undisputed that applicant did not file action within that time--Through this motion, applicant asking Court to extend time period--This Court cannot extend time period simply because does not have jurisdiction to extend time limit--Relevant parts of Act, s. 30 similar to Customs Act, s. 135(1), (2)--In Dawe v. Canada (1994), 174 N.R. 1, Federal Court of Appeal made following remarks regarding this Court's ability to extend time limit in Customs Act, s. 135(2): "a limitation period is dictated by very fundamental principles relating to an efficient and proper administration of justice. Litigation has to come to an end so that judgments and decisions can be enforced. [Limitation periods cannot] be waived or extended in the absence of clear statutory provision"--These principles apply to situation before Court--Motion for extension of time dismissed--Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, S.C. 2000, c. 17, ss. 1 (as am. by S.C. 2001, c. 41, s. 48), 25 (as am. idem, s. 61), 30(1)--Customs Act, R.S.C., 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 1, s. 135 (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 49; 2002, c. 8, s. 134).