Date: 19990819
Docket: T-1212-90
OTTAWA, Ontario, August 19, 1999
| PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HUGESSEN |
BETWEEN:
JEAN CHARLES ST-ONGE
Applicant
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
ORDER
The applicant"s motion is dismissed.
The motion for summary judgment presented by the respondent will be heard at Ottawa on November 22, 1999, at 10:00 a.m., the motion record will be filed on October 1, 1999, the applicant"s record on November 8, 1999 and the reply, if any, on November 15, 1999.
James K. Hugessen
Judge
Certified true translation
Bernard Olivier
Date: 19990819
Docket: T-1212-90
BETWEEN:
JEAN CHARLES ST-ONGE
Applicant
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
( Delivered from the bench at Ottawa, Ontario
on August 19, 1999).
HUGESSEN J.
- . The respondent in this case presented a motion for summary judgment supported by the affidavit of Mrs. Cecchini. The applicant filed an affidavit opposing the motion for summary judgment. The applicant waived his right to cross-examine Mrs. Cecchini on her affidavit, but presented a motion to have the affidavit in question struck out. It is the latter motion that I am deciding here.
- . In his written submissions, the applicant alleges that the affidavit does not comply with Rule 81, i.e. that it is technically invalid. However, I have read the affidavit and it seems clear to me that all the factual statements made by the witness are either statements based on personal knowledge or statements based on sources of information that are identified, as the Rule requires.
- 3. During the oral presentation of his motion, it became clear that the applicant objected primarily not to the form of the affidavit, but rather to its content. He stated repeatedly that particular statements in the affidavit were lies, false, incorrect, concealed the truth, and so forth.
- 4. Clearly the applicant misunderstood the purpose of a motion of this kind. The applicant may be right. Some or even all of the affiant"s statements may - and I emphasize the word may - be incorrect or false. During the hearing of the motion for summary judgment, the judge may not accept Mrs. Cecchini"s affidavit and may prefer the affidavit filed by the applicant. However, at this stage of the proceedings, it is not for the Court to strike out the affidavit merely because it may eventually be rejected by the Court on the merits of the motion for summary judgment.
- . Accordingly, the applicant"s motion to strike out Mrs. Cecchini"s affidavit will be dismissed.
James K. Hugessen
Judge
Certified true translation
Bernard Olivier
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
| COURT NO.: T-1212-90 |
| STYLE OF CAUSE: JEAN-CHARLES ST-ONGE v. |
| HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN |
| PLACE OF HEARING: OTTAWA, ONTARIO |
| DATE OF HEARING: AUGUST 19, 1999 |
| REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BY: HUGESSEN J. |
| DATED: August 19, 1999 |
APPEARANCES:
| Jean-Charles St-Onge, representing himself FOR THE APPLICANT |
| Jan Brongers FOR THE RESPONDENT |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Jean-Charles St-Onge, representing himself FOR THE APPLICANT
| Jan Brongers FOR THE RESPONDENT |
Justice Canada