Baroud v. Canada
IMM-4914-94
Hugessen J.
24/11/98
5 pp.
Status review-Main action Charter-based attack upon validity of Immigration Act and particularly s. 40.1 thereof-Plaintiff has now been deported from Canada and cannot return to this country for trial or pre-trial purposes-In deciding in what manner to exercise wide discretion granted to it by r. 382 at conclusion of status review, following notice of status review pursuant to rr. 380 and 381, Court needs to be concerned primarily with two questions: what are reasons why case has not moved forward faster and do they justify delay that has occurred; and what steps is plaintiff now proposing to move matter forward?-Two questions clearly inter-related in that if good excuse for delay, Court not likely to be very exigent in requiring action plan from plaintiff-On other hand, if no good excuse advanced to justify delay, plaintiff should be prepared to demonstrate that he recognizes that he has responsibility to Court to move action along-Declarations of good intent and desire to proceed clearly not enough-Fact defendant may have been lax largely irrelevant: primary responsibility for carriage of case normally resting with plaintiff and at status review, Court will look to him for explanations-Plaintiff herein came up short on both aspects of test-Appropriate case for order of dismissal for delay-Admission by counsel that whatever issues still remain lively in this action are being advanced in another action remove whatever residual interest plaintiff may have in obtaining declarations of invalidity-Order dismissing action for delay would not, of course, have effect of res judicata-Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 380, 381, 382-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 40.1 (as enacted by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 29, s. 4; S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 31).