 Printer-Friendly Page
Date: 19980608
Docket: A-104-97 (T-1977-94)
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A. DÉCARY J.A. LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
BETWEEN:
ROBERT LAVIGNE;
Applicant-Appellant
- and -
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (FORMERLY HEALTH AND WELFARE CANADA);
Respondent-Respondent
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN;
Respondent-Respondent
- and -
THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES;
Intervenor
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Montreal, Quebec, on Monday, June 8, 1998)
MARCEAU J.A.
[1] We are all of the view that the decision appealed against cannot be overturned by this Court. The motions judge could not but confirm that lay litigants cannot receive counsel's fees, under the Federal Court Rules, when they have successfully represented themselves. Under Tariff B of those Rules, a service cannot be rendered by a litigant to himself. The Courts, be it the Trial Division or the Court of Appeal, are not at liberty to change what is legislation.
[2] We are prepared to admit that the appellant has a point when he says that it could be unfair to deny successful lay litigants, who could not afford to be represented by counsel, some costs that could compensate them for the time they had to give and the "legal skills" they had to apply to satisfy the requirements of the Rules for bringing their cases to the tribunal. We are not sure that the actual rule 400(4) (formerly 344(4)) could not, to a certain extent, be used to satisfy, in special cases, what fairness could dictate in that respect. However, we have no doubt that a change in the Act or the Rules would be required to provide openly that lay litigants could be entitled, in whole or in part, to fees that, up until now, have always been formally reserved to counsel.
[3] As to whether the Rule as it exists could be seen as breaching rights protected by the Charter, specially those covered by sections 7 and 15, as the appellant urged the Court to decide, we are of the view that it is not so, as already found by the Court in Rubin v. Canada (A.G.), [1990] 3 F.C. 642.
[4] The appeal must be dismissed with costs, if required.
"Louis Marceau" J.A.
Date: 19980608
Docket: A-104-97 (T-1977-94)
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A. DÉCARY J.A. LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
BETWEEN:
ROBERT LAVIGNE;
Applicant-Appellant
- and -
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (FORMERLY HEALTH AND WELFARE CANADA);
Respondent-Respondent
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN;
Respondent-Respondent
- and -
THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES;
Intervenor
Heard at Montreal, Quebec, on Monday, June 8, 1998.
Judgment rendered from the Bench on Monday, June 8, 1998.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MARCEAU J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 19980608
Docket: A-104-97 (T-1977-94)
BETWEEN:
ROBERT LAVIGNE;
Applicant-Appellant
- and -
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (FORMERLY HEALTH AND WELFARE CANADA);
Respondent-Respondent
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN;
Respondent-Respondent
- and -
THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES;
Intervenor
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD COURT FILE NO.: A-104-97 STYLE OF CAUSE:Robert Lavigne v. Human Resources Development et al PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Québec DATE OF HEARING: June 8, 1998 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF MARCEAU J.A., DÉCARY J.A., LÉTOURNEAU J.A. DATED: June 19, 1998 APPEARANCES: Mr. Robert LavigneFOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT Mr. Raymond Piché FOR RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mr. Robert Lavigne FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT Montréal, Québec Mr. George Thomson FOR RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
