|
Cullen J. dismissed the application. Cullen J. found that F had not satisfactorily explained the long delay in making his application, and the law was quite clear that an unreasonable delay in applying for relief by way of certiorari may be a bar to granting it. In Cullen J's view, the unexplained delay of 20 months in making the application was a bar to the granting of the relief sought in this case. Furthermore, Cullen J. noted that there was no absolute right to counsel in every instance, and it was not uncommon for the chairman of an administrative tribunal, a quasi-judicial or judicial tribunal, to make the determination of the necessity of the requirement for counsel in a given situation in the interest of natural justice. In this case, F indicated a wish or a need for counsel. F was clearly given time to contact his counsel, G, so that he might prepare a written submission concerning why counsel was required. Cullen J. found that despite four adjournments, no communication was ever sent by G to the disciplinary court. Also, other than the statement that he had contacted G and that G had agreed to represent him, there is no explanation in any of F's affidavits as to why G did not submit a written submission or even contact the independent chairpersons. Nor was there an affidavit from G filed to assist the court on whether he had agreed to act, and if so, why he hadn't contacted the two chairpersons.
|
TOP