PRACTICE |
Contempt of Court |
Conille v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
T-1063-98
2001 FCT 932, Lemieux J.
22/8/01
14 pp.
Motion under r. 467(2) for order enjoining respondent to answer to charge of contempt of Court in relation to mandamus issued by Tremblay-Lamer J.--Order sought against six employees of Government of Canada--Counsel for respondent seeking stay of proceedings on ground of non-disclosure by applicant of certain information required of him--Applicant trying to obtain Canadian citizenship since 1991--In 1988 pleaded guilty to charge of causing death by criminal negligence--Rr. 466 to 470 establish code governing contempt of Court--Crown required to disclose all relevant information to defence, both that which intends to introduce in evidence and that which does not and whether inculpatory or exculpatory--In contempt of Court cases, which are essentially criminal in nature, applicant who has obtained order from Court under rule 467(1) enjoining person to appear before Court to hear proof of act with which charged and be prepared to defend himself or herself, has obligation to communicate evidence to defence--However, nature and extent of disclosure may be worked out only in context of concrete situations and in accordance with scheme provided by Rules--Up to judge on merits to decide in precise context whether disclosure requirements in case have been observed--Motion for stay of proceedings must be denied--In interests of justice that leave be given for subpoenas requested by applicant in order that evidence of documents on which applicant relying may be presented--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 466, 467, 468, 469, 470.