PRACTICE |
Discovery |
Atlantic Prudence Fund Corp. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-2294-96, IMM-2296-96, IMM-2297-96
Hugessen J.
17/7/00
7 pp.
Motions: (1) for order compelling respondent to admit or deny document pursuant to r. 255; (2) for declaration respondent required to produce certain documents pursuant to r. 317, within application for judicial review of Minister's decision to suspend approvals as approved funds under Immigrant Investor Program--Motions dismissed--R. 255 not directly applying to applications--Applications designed to be dealt with quickly, efficiently--Evidence on applications by way of affidavit--Party attacking administrative decision must know, set forth grounds for attack, evidentiary foundation thereof, when proceedings launched--Possibility of case arising where justice requiring party to application be required to admit, deny document which could not otherwise be put to opponent's deponent on cross-examination--Power to make such order existing as adjunct to Court's inherent right to control process, or in specially managed case, under r. 385--This is not such a case--Applicants in possession of copy of document on which seek respondent's admission--Obtained it on access to information request so proof of provenance not difficult--Production of document as part of applicants' record will cast burden of disproving or explaining it on Crown--No reason why respondent's deponent could not be cross-examined on it--R. 317 notice to admit ineffective because of lack of specificity--Again applicants in possession of copies of documents referred to in request for material; obtained them as result of access to information proceedings--R. 317 neither intended as substitute for those proceedings nor as means of avoiding protections for both public, private interests under Access to Information Act--If applicants think documents mentioned in notice relevant to case, can produce them--If believing other documents "similar to, relating to or bearing upon" such documents, can seek them under Access to Information Act--R. 317 not requiring tribunal to engage in extended, exhaustive search for material whose relevance may at best be marginal and whose selection will necessarily involve exercise of judgment--Applicants must know facts upon which propose to argue impugned decisions should be set aside--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 255, 317.