http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/127097/index.do
Olumide v. Canada (November 27, 2015 – 2015 FCA 270, Nadon (author), Pelletier, Gleason JJ. A.).
Précis: Mr. Olumide applied for judicial review of a number of CRA decisions refusing him rebate claims. He claimed that his application was made in time because the claims were part of an “’ongoing matter’ not subject to any prescribed time periods for the filing of a judicial review application [para. 2]. Martineau J. in the Federal Court held that the 30 day limitation applied to each claim and the application of Mr. Olumide was therefore late and, in any event, had no reasonable chance of success. Mr. Olumide appealed that decision as well as another decision in which Justice Martineau had dismissed his application to clarify the first decision.
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals with costs.
Decision: Justice Nadon’s reasons were direct and to the point:
[5] With respect to the first order made by the Judge, it is my view that the appeal in regard thereto should be dismissed. Notwithstanding Mr. Olumide’s forceful arguments that we should intervene, I have not been persuaded that there is any basis to do so. More particularly, he was unable to satisfy me that the Judge had made an error of law or that he had made a palpable and overriding error in regard to the factual determinations underpinning his legal conclusions. It is also clear, in my view, that the Judge did not make any error in exercising his discretion in regard to the matter before him.
[6] With regard to the second order, I am satisfied that there was no basis upon which the appellant’s motion could succeed. Thus the Judge made no reviewable error in refusing to clarify his first order.
Both appeals were dismissed with costs.