|
Judicial Review - Perfection. Isaac v. Law Society of Ontario
In Isaac v. Law Society of Ontario (Div Court, 2022) the Divisional Court considered whether amending a Notice of Appeal re-started the timeline for perfection:Filing an Amended Notice of Appeal does not Restart the Time for Perfecting an Appeal
[29] Justice Corbett made no error in finding that Mr. Isaac’s decision to file an amended notice of appeal did not re-start the time for perfecting his appeal.
[30] Mr. Isaac was entitled to file an amended notice of appeal. Rule 61.08 allows an appellant to amend the notice of appeal without leave before the appeal is perfected, to give notice of its intention to seek additional or different relief, raise different grounds or rely on different evidence than originally contemplated. However, filing an amended notice of appeal does not alter the time requirements for perfecting the appeal, which are set out in Rule 61.09(1):61.09 (1) The appellant shall perfect the appeal by complying with subrules (2) and (3),
(a) where no transcript of evidence is required for the appeal, within thirty days after filing the notice of appeal; or
(b) where a transcript of evidence is required for the appeal, within 60 days after receiving notice that the evidence has been transcribed. [31] There is no reference in Rule 61.09 to an amended notice of appeal. The time for perfecting an appeal starts to run when the original notice of appeal is filed. Unless the time is extended on a motion under Rule 3.02, the deadlines set out in Rule 61.09(1) continue to run from the filing of the original notice of appeal, not from the filing of an amended notice.
[32] In any event, even if Mr. Isaac’s amended notice of appeal did restart the filing deadline clock, he would have been required to perfect his appeal by the end of June 2021. When his appeal was dismissed, nearly eight months had passed since he filed the amended notice. Mr. Isaac has still not filed any materials for his appeal, and has failed to comply with the deadline he claims should have applied when he filed the amended notice.
|
