PRACTICE |
Limitation of Actions |
Whirlpool Corp. v. Camco Inc.
T-2028-95
2001 FCT 689, Hugessen J.
20/6/01
7 pp.
Motions for directions brought in each of two files--Serious issue raised with respect to timeliness of motions--Motions out of time--When r. 403 requires such motion be made within 30 days of judgment, it is referring, in case of Trial Division, to Trial Division decision--Similar situation occurred in well-known decision of Stein Estate v. The Kathy K, [1976] 2 F.C. 69 (T.D.) where similar motion brought long time after initial Trial Division judgment as question of costs not spoken to, left aside by counsel, Court--Rule in this Court that judgment not suspended, held in abeyance by filing of appeal--Arguing against interpretation put by plaintiffs on word "judgment" in r. 403--If motions timely, Cullen J., who presided at trial would have been in better position to make fair adjudication on various requests made by plaintiffs--Prejudice not only factor to be considered when deciding whether or not to extend time--Motions dismissed--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 403.