Citation: 2006 FC 349
Ottawa, Ontario, March 16, 2006
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HUGESSEN
BETWEEN:
Applicant
and
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
(Delivered from the bench by teleconference at Ottawa, Ontario
and Montréal, Quebec on March 15, 2006)
In response to the respondent’s motion for an order that applicant and affiant Michel Vennat answer the questions asked of him during the cross-examination on his affidavit held on January 14, 2006, and that he provide certain documents in his control;
[1]
In my opinion, the main issues raised in the motion are not
relevant to this case. While it may be that the correctness of the Superior
Court’s decision in proceedings to which the applicant was not a party is an
issue to be considered by this court, the opinions of counsel, however eminent,
are not relevant.
The other issues raised are purely collateral to this dispute, such as the date
on which the applicant found out that counsel of his former employer, the
Development Bank of Canada, would not be relieved of solicitor-client
privilege, and the costs incurred to defend the Bank before the Superior Court,
and are also irrelevant.
[2]
The motion is dismissed. Costs in the cause.
ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS that:
The motion be dismissed, costs in the cause.
Ottawa, Ontario
Signed on March 16, 2006
Certified true translation
Francie Gow
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-611-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: MICHEL VENNAT v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario and Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: March 15, 2006
APPEARANCES:
LOUIS P. BÉLANGER
|
FOR THE APPLICANT |
MARTINE L. TREMBLAY
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
GEORGE J. POLLACK
|
FOR THE INTERVENER |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
STIKEMAN ELLIOTT MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
|
FOR THE APPLICANT |
KLUGER KANDESTIN LLP MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
DAVIES WARD PHILLIPS & VINEBERG LLP MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
|
FOR THE INTERVENER |