Federal Courts Rules procedural amendments

Summary#

These are final amendments to the Federal Courts Rules published as Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules: SOR/2021-151. They are mostly housekeeping changes that clarify wording, fix English–French inconsistencies, and cut down on how many paper copies have to be filed in some cases. The rules came into force on June 17, 2021.

What it does#

• Reduces paper copying in some cases:

  • Adds Rule 72.4 to allow filing one fewer paper copy when all parties are based in the National Capital Region and agree the case will proceed there.
  • Where paper copies are required, the amendments standardize the numbers: generally three paper copies for the Federal Court and five for the Federal Court of Appeal (unless Rule 72.4 applies). Electronic copies are accepted in many instances instead of paper.

• Clarifies and standardizes filing and hearing procedures:

  • A request for a special hearing date must now be accompanied by a motion record.
  • Motions that are likely to run longer than 2 hours are treated as “special” for scheduling.
  • Where a respondent files a single combined memorandum as appellant by cross-appeal, that combined document must not exceed 60 pages (not counting certain parts and appendices).
  • Amendments to filed documents must show the rule or order authorizing the change and the date the amendment is made; some amendments require underlining and proof of service.

• Language and form updates:

  • Several forms (for example, Form 301, Form 314, Form 316.2, Form 337, Form 347) were updated to clarify where the claimed relief appears, to ask about the language of materials (English/French), and to add options like requests for an interpreter.
  • Requisition and hearing forms now explicitly ask whether hearing materials will be in English, French, or both.

• Other technical fixes and alignments:

  • Adds that proof of service for a notice of a constitutional question must be filed “without delay” after service.
  • Treats summary applications under the Income Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act the same way in Part 7 procedures.
  • Updates rules about when judges or prothonotaries must fix trial dates (only if not already fixed at pre-trial).
  • Removes references to provisions of the Citizenship Act that have already been repealed.
  • Makes a number of rule-number and wording changes across the Rules to remove contradictions between the English and French texts.

Who's affected#

• Parties and lawyers involved in cases before the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal.
• The Courts Administration Service, which handles filing, copying and storage of court records.
• Cases and litigants based in the National Capital Region are the most likely to see immediate changes to the number of paper copies they must file.
• Small businesses and other organizations that bring or defend federal court proceedings may notice modest savings from reduced copying and shipping.
• If it is unclear whether a specific filing or situation is affected, parties should check the amended rule text or contact the court registry.

Why it matters#

• Less paperwork and cost: filing one fewer paper copy in qualifying National Capital Region cases reduces printing, shipping and storage costs for litigants and for the court. The Gazette notes around 450 new proceedings per year in the Federal Court of Appeal and about 8,000 per year in the Federal Court — although only some of those would be eligible for the reduced-copy rule.
• Clearer rules: fixes to wording and alignment between English and French reduce uncertainty about what litigants must do. That can save time and lower the chance of procedural mistakes.
• Practical, not substantive: these are mainly administrative and procedural fixes rather than changes to legal rights or major court powers. They are intended to make existing practice smoother and more consistent.