Le v. Canada
T-1890-93
Rouleau J.
16/11/94
5 pp.
Applicant, husband arrested for illegal importation of cigarettes-Goods, car seized-Seven months later husband pleading guilty, charge against applicant stayed-Same day applicant requesting return of car-Since one-month statutory period for redemption provided in Excise Act, s. 117 expired, notice of claim rejected, car condemned-Applicant invoking s. 164, permitting person other than person accused of offence resulting in seizure of vehicle, claiming interest in vehicle to apply for declaration of interest-Application dismissed- S. 164 directed at parties unrelated to offence in which vehicle may be involved-Applicant very much aware of incident-In absence of specific provision allowing extension of statutory limitation period Court lacking jurisdiction to grant extension of time to applicant, regardless of Crown counsel's consent-Applicant's Charter, ss. 7, 13 rights not violated-No prejudice if claiming car before expiry of limitation period as Crown could prove ownership by producing automobile registration-Excise Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-14, ss. 117, 164-Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, being Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B, Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (U.K.) [R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 44], ss. 7, 13.