Federal Court of Appeal of Canada Crest Federal Court of Appeal of Canada
français

Access to decisions


Recent Decisions


Access by

Year
Style of Cause
Docket Number
Neutral Citation

Search


Stay Informed


Other Decisions

Federal Court
Tax Court of Canada
Supreme Court of Canada
Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs
Printer-Friendly PagePrinter-Friendly Page

Date: 19990428


Docket: A-732-97

     A-733-97

CORAM:      LINDEN J.A.

         ROTHSTEIN J.A.

         MCDONALD J.A.

     A-732-97

BETWEEN:

     KULDIP SINGH DHALIWAL,

     Applicant,

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

     Respondent.

     A-733-97

AND BETWEEN:

     BALWINDER KAUR DHALIWAL,

     Applicant,

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

     Respondent.

Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia on April 28, 1999

Judgment delivered at Vancouver, British Columbia on April 28, 1999

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:      LINDEN J.A.


Date: 19990428


Docket: A-732-97

A-733-97

CORAM:      LINDEN J.A.

         ROTHSTEIN J.A.
         MCDONALD J.A.

     A-732-97

BETWEEN:

     KULDIP SINGH DHALIWAL,

     Applicant,

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

     Respondent.

     A-733-97

AND BETWEEN:

     BALWINDER KAUR DHALIWAL,

     Applicant,

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

     Respondent.

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

     (Delivered orally in Vancouver, British Columbia, April 28, 1999)

LINDEN J.A.

[1]      In our view, on the only issue being contested in these appeals, that is the alleged denial of natural justice, there is no basis for interfering with the decisions of the umpire. The Board of Referees being reviewed by him exercised its discretion to refuse another adjournment based on the particular facts of these cases. We can see no reasons for interference.

[2]      In Siloch v. Minister of Employment and Immigration1, the case relied on by counsel, the applicant was present at a scheduled hearing, but without counsel who was supposed to attend, but did not. Here no one appeared at the hearing, but an adjournment was sought at the last minute by telephone call and fax. The Board was not required on these facts and in the light of the history of these cases in which an adjournment had already been granted on the condition that no further adjournments would be granted.

[3]      These applications will be dismissed.

                             (Sgd.) "A.M. Linden"

                                 J.A.

Vancouver, British Columbia

28 April 1999

     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL


Date: 19990428


Docket: A-732-97

A-733-97

     A-732-97

BETWEEN:

     KULDIP SINGH DHALIWAL,

     Applicant,

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

     Respondent.

     A-733-97

AND BETWEEN:

     BALWINDER KAUR DHALIWAL,

     Applicant,

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

     Respondent.

    

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

    

     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DATED:                  April 28, 1999

COURT NO.:             A-732-97 and A-733-97

STYLE OF CAUSE:          (A-732-97) Kuldip Singh Dhaliwal v. AGC

                     and

                     (A-733-97) Balwinder Kaur Dhaliwal v. HMQ

PLACE OF HEARING:          Vancouver, BC

DATE OF HEARING:          April 28, 1999

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LINDEN J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:      ROTHSTEIN J.A.

                 MCDONALD J.A.

APPEARANCES:

     Mr. A. MacLean      for the applicant

     Ms. L. Wanamaker      for the respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

     Schroeder & Co.      for the applicant

     Barristers and Solicitors

     1119 - 808 Nelson St.
     Vancouver, BC

     Morris Rosenberg      for the respondent

     Deputy Attorney General

     of Canada

__________________

     1      (1993), 10 A.L.R. (2d) 285 (F.C.A.).


Modified : 2007-04-24 Top of the page Important Notices

[ Download Adobe Reader  |  Printer-Friendly Page ]