COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
RAM CHARAN SINGH (Appellant) v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by THE MINISTER OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL JIM FLAHERTY, J. RAFTERY and KAMLA TIRBAYNEE (Respondents)
BEFORE:
DOHERTY, MOLDAVER and FELDMAN JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Patrick Di Monte for the appellant
Lynne McArdle for the Crown respondent
J. Stone for the respondent, Tirbaynee
HEARD & ENDORSED:
March 30, 2004
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1The only notice of appeal in existence was served and filed before the motion judge released his decision with respect to the "Crown" defendants. He dismissed the claim against the other defendant. This document could not constitute a notice of appeal as against the Crown defendants, even though it referred to all of the defendants, including the Crown defendants.
2No steps have been taken to remedy this deficiency in almost two years despite timely notice by the Crown that it would take the position that there is no appeal against the Crown in existence.
3No material has been filed that would justify an extension of the time to file a proper notice of appeal. In any event, we heard full argument on the merit of the appeal and are satisfied there is no merit. Counsel abandoned any argument against the disposition as it related to Raftery. We agree with the motion judge that the appellant's submissions as against the other Crown defendants cannot prevail in the light of s. 7(1) of the Proceedings Against the Crown Act. Consequently, even if we were inclined to relieve against the failure to file a valid notice of appeal, we would not do so as the appeal has no merit. It is not in the interests of justice to extend the time.
4We have received the Crown's submissions on costs. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that there should be no order as to costs.