PRACTICE |
Case Management |
Tempo Marble & Granite Ltd. v. MecKlenburg 1 (The)
T-404-00
2002 FCT 1190, Hargrave P.
14/11/02
11 pp.
Motions by defendants, Canadian Pacific Railway Co., Canada Maritime Ltd. (Bermuda) to strike out portion of one of plaintiffs' affidavits, all of second affidavit--As preliminary matter, one counsel questioning jurisdiction of case managers under r. 385(1)(d)--Rule dealing with two different matters; first being temporal extent of jurisdiction of case management judge, prothonotary; second giving other members of Court, hearing judge, liberty to deal with motions, particularly as to trial management--In Seaspan International Ltd. v. Canada, T-1709-90, 2001 FCT 937; [2001] F.C.J. No. 1334 (T.D.) (QL), Dawson J. pointed out trial judge hearing action maintains complete control over trial process, retains unimpeded jurisdiction to hear motion brought by party during trial to amend pleadings-- Nothing in Rule intended to foreclose motion made to judge appointed to hear trial-- Seaspan standing for proposition that while case managers required to deal with all matters arising before trial, ultimate qualification merely relieves case managers of obligation to hear all motions before trial without exception, leaving it open to appointed trial judge to deal with trial management matters --To extend r. 385(1)(d) to loss of jurisdiction by case managers, requiring trial judges to hear all interlocutory motions taking place in year or so between allocation of trial date, hearing, would be to great disappoint-ment, surprise of overworked Trial Division judges--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 385.