Date: 20001019
Docket: IMM-4810-99
BETWEEN:
| JOSE ROBERTO HERNANDEZ GUZMAN |
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
NADON, J.:
[1] This judicial review application seeks to set aside a decision of the Minister's delegate, W. A. Sheppitt who, on April 27, 1997 issued an opinion that the Applicant constitutes a danger to the public in Canada. Mr. Sheppitt's opinion was communicated to the Applicant on September 16, 1998.
[2] The present application is the second application brought by the Applicant to set aside Mr. Sheppitt's decision. The first application was filed on November 13, 1998 but on February 8, 1999 McGillis, J. dismissed it by reason of the Applicant's failure to file his Record. The Applicant then filed a motion to, inter alia, set aside McGillis' J.'s order. The motion was argued before Teitelbaum, J. on August 16, 1999 who, on September 3, 1999 dismissed the motion and certified three questions. On September 15, 1999 the Applicant filed a notice of appeal. I understand that the appeal will probably be heard in February, 2001.
[3] The present applications for judicial review was filed on September 29, 1999. On August 8, 2000 Lemieux, J. gave leave to the Applicant and ordered that the application be heard in Calgary on October 19, 2000.
[4] The first and second applications are identical. They both seek to set aside Mr. Sherritt's opinion, dated April 27, 1997 that the Applicant constitutes a danger to the public in Canada.
[5] The Court should not and will not allow two identical proceedings to be pursued. This, in my view, is an abuse of process. If the Court of Appeal allows the Applicant's appeal, the Applicant will be able to pursue the proceedings dismissed by McGillis, J. If the appeal is denied, the first proceedings will be at an end. McGillis, J.'s order will stand.
[6] Whether as a result of a dismissal of his appeal, the Applicant can pursue his second application is an issue I need not address.
[7] The Applicant seems to be of the view that by reason of Lemieux, J.'s order dated August 8, 2000, the orders of McGillis, J. and Teitelbaum, J. are of no legal effect. I am not convinced of the correctness of this position. However, as I have just indicated, I need not address this issue at the present time.
[8] For these reasons, the hearing of this application is adjourned sine die. I will, however, remain seized of this matter until otherwise ordered.
"Marc Nadon"
JUDGE
Calgary, Alberta,
October 19, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20001019
Docket: IMM-4810-99
BETWEEN:
JOSE ROBERTO HERNANDEZ GUZMAN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: 20001019
| STYLE OF CAUSE: JOSE ROBERTO HERNANDEZ GUZMAN |
v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: CALGARY, Alberta
DATE OF HEARING: October 19, 2000
REASONS FOR REASONS FOR ORDER OF NADON, J.
DATED: October 19, 2000
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Tony Clark
Calgary, Alberta FOR APPLICANT
Mr. Brad Hardstaff
Edmonton, Alberta FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Sherritt Greene
Calgary, Alberta FOR APPLICANT
Morris A. Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario FOR RESPONDENT