Responding Motion Record of National Post May 13 13

8/23/2019 Responding Motion Record of National Post May 13 13

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/responding-motion-record-of-national-post-may-13-13 1/132

BETWEEN:

Court F i l e No. A-394-12 and A-395-12

FEDERALCOURT OF APPEAL

RICHARDWARMAN nd NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

Appellants

~rre

MARKFOURNIER nd CONSTANCEFOURNIER

Re s p ondent s

RESPONDING MOTIONRECORD OFTHE APPELLANT,

NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

(Motion for leave to intervene, to be heard i n writing)

CASSELSBROCK& LACKWELLLLP

2100 S c o t i a Plaza

40 ing S t r e e t W e s t

Toronto,ON M5H 3C2

C a s e y C h i s i c k LSUC : 46572R

T e l : 416.869.5403

Fax: 416.644.9326c c h i s i c [email protected]

Jason Beitchman LSUC : 564770

T e l : 416.860.2988

Fax: 647.259.7993

[email protected]

S o l i c i t o r s f o r the A p p e l l a n t ,

N a t i o n a l Post Company



y~

TO: SAMUELSON-GLUSHKO CANADIANINTERNET

POLICY&PUBLIC INTEREST CLINIC (CIPPIC)

U n i v e r s i t y o f Ottawa, F a c u l t y o f Law,

Common La w Section

57 Louis Pasteur S t r e e t

OttawaON

K1 N6N5

David F e w e r LSUC :45307C

T e i : 613.562.5800, x t . 2558

Fax: 613.562.5417

S o l i c i t o r s f o r the Propo s e d I n t e r v e n e r

AND TO: BRAZEAUSELLER LLP

B a r r i s t e r s an d S o l i c i t o r s

55 etcalfe S t r e e t

S u i t e 750

Ottawa ON K1P6L5

James Katz

T e l : 613.237.4000 x t . 267

Fax: 613.237.4001


Richard Warman

AND TO: MARK n d CONSTANCE FOURNIER

2000 U n i t y R o a d

E l g i n b u r g ON KOH NO

T e l : 613.929.9265

Fax: 609.379.8793

R e s p o n d e n t s





BETWEEN:




Appellants

- and -

MARKFOURNIER nd CONSTANCEFOURNIER

Respondents

RESPONDING MOTIONRECORD OFTHEAPPELLANT,NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

(Motion for leave to intervene, to be heard i n writing)

INDEX

Tab Description Page

1 . D r a f t Order 01-03

2. A f f i d a v i t o f C a i t l i n R u s s e l l , s w o r n May 3, 2013, along w i t h the 04-05

e x h i b i t s l i s t e d t h e r e i n

A E x h i b i t "A" o the A f f i d a v i t of a i t l i n R u s s e l l , a co py o f the N o t i c e 06-17

o f Appeal o f the N a t i o n a l Post n Court F i l e No. A-394-12

B E x h i b i t "B" o the A f f i d a v i t of C a i t l i n R u s s e l l , a c o p y of the N o t i c e 1 8-25

o f Appeal o f Richard Warman n Court F i l e No. A-395-12

C E x h i b i t "C" o the A f f i d a v i t of C a i t l i n R u s s e l l , a c o p y of the Order 2 6-30

o f Mr . J u s t i c e P e l l e t i e r , dated D e c embe r 18, 2 0 1 2

3. W r i t t e n Representations of the A p p e l l a n t , N a t i o n a l Post 31 -43Company, dated May 3, 2 0 13

4. Warman e t a l . v . F o u r n i e r , 2 0 1 2 FC803 44-60

5. Canada D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n &Re s earch) . A i r Canada 61 -73

(1988), 1989]2 .C.88 F e d. C.A.



6. Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) v . Corbiere 1996), 74-78

1 9 9 N.R. (Fed. C.A.)

7. Ferroequus Railway Co . . C.N.R., 2003 FCA 08 79- 9 1

8. Edmonton Friends of he North Environmental Society . Canada 92-100

(Min. of Western Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n ) , [1991] F.C. 41 6(C.A.)

9. Sandy Pond l l i a n c e t o Protect Canadian Waters n c . v . Canada 101-114

(Attorney General), 2011 FC 58





D


FEDERALCOURTOF APPEAL

Ottawa, O n t a r i o ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T H E. . . . . . . . .

Present: ) DAYOF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2013

BETWEEN:

(Court Seal)


- and -

MARKFOURNIER nd CONSTANCE FOURNIER

~ ~:

Appellants

Res pondents

WHEREAS Samu e ls on-Glushko Canadian I n t e r n e t P o l i c y and P u b l i c I n t e r e s t

C l i n i c(CIP PIC" ) has a p p l i e d f o r an o r d e r g r a n t i n g i t leave t o i n t e r v e n e i n t wo r e l a t e d

appeals o f the d e c i s i o n o f Mr. J u s t i c e Rennie dated June 21, 2011, n Federal Court F i l e

No . T-784- 1 1 , i n appeals A-394-12 and A-395- 1 2 ;

ANDWHEREAS f t e r c o n s i d e r i n g the submissions o f CIP PIC and the responding

submissions o f the N a t i o n a lPost C o m p any;

THIS COURTORDERS h a t :

1 . Leav e t o i n t e r v e n e i n the appeals A-394-12 and A-395-12 s g r a n t e d , s u b j e c t t o the

f o l l o w i n g terms:



(a) CIPPIC s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d t o address o n l y the o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

( i ) Th e a p p l i c a t i o n o f the s t a t u t o r y l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d set out i n

subsection 41(1) f the CopyrightAct, R.S.C. 1985, . C- 4 2 , t o works

p u b l i s h e d o n the I n t e r n e t ;

( i i ) Th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f " d i s t i n c t i v e" , as t a t e d i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f "work"

i n s e c t i o n 2 f the Copyright c t ;

( i i i ) Wha t c o n s t i t u t e s " s u b s t a n t i a l " r e p r o d u c t i o n as s t a t e d i n

subsection 3(1) f the Copyrig ht c t ;

( i v ) Th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t a t u t o r y c o n d i t i o n s precedent t o the f a i r

d e a l i n g e x c e p t i o n s , as l i s t e d i n s e c t i o n 29 n d s e c t i o n s 2 9 . 1 an d

29.2 o f the Copyright c t ; an d

(v) Th e circumstances i n which an excerpt f o r the p ur p ose o f n e w s

r e p o r t i n g o r c r i t i c i s m should be considered f a i r " d e a l i n g ;

(b) CIPPIC s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d t o f i l e a m e m o r a n d u m o f f a c t an d l a w , n o t t o

exceed 20 ages, which s h a l l be served an d i l e d w i t h i n 3 0 days f the date

o f t h i s Order. Th e N a t i o n a l Post s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d t o f i l e a responding

m e m o r a n d u m o f f a c t an d law not o exceed 2 0 pages, i t h i n 3 0 days f the

s e r v i c e o f CIPPIC's m e m o r a n d u m . There h a l l be n o r e p l y ;

(c) CIPPIC s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d t o address the Court a t the h e a r i n g o f the

Appeals, b u t i t s o r a l submissions h a l l n o t exceed 3 0 minutes;



03

(d) CIPPIC s h a l l n o t d u p l i c a t e the submissions o f the o t h e r p a r t i e s ;

(e ) CIPPIC s h a l l be bound by the r e c o r d and may n o t i n t r o d u c e any n e w

evidence;

( f l CIPPIC s h a l l have no r i g h t t o appeal;

(g) No osts s h a l l be awarded i n favour o f o r a g a i n s t CIPPIC i n r e l a t i o n t o i t s

i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the Appeals; and

2. CIPPIC h a l l b e added t o the s t y l e o f cause n the A p p ea l s as an i n t e r v e n e r .



~ , ~



0

BETWEEN:




- and -

MARK FOURNIER nd CONSTANCE FOURNIER

AFFIDAVIT OF AITLIN RUSSELL(SWORNMAY 3, 2013)

A p p e l l a n t s

Respondents

I , C a i t l i n R u s s e l l , o f the c i t y o f Toronto, n the p r o v i n c e o f O n t a r i o , SWEAR HAT:

1 . I am an a r t i c l i n g student w i t h the f i r m o f Cassels, Bro ck &Blackwell LLP, counsel

t o the N a t i o n a l Post Company(National Post" ) and am s s i s ti n g w i t h t h i s m a t t e r . As

such, I have personal knowledge o f the m a t t e r s h e r e i n a f t e r deposed. Where my

knowledge i s based o n i n f o r m a t i o n and b e l i e f , I have so s t a t e d and b e l i e v e such

i n f o r m a t i o n and b e l i e f t o be t r u e .

2. Attached h e r e t o as E x h i b i t " A" s a copy o f the N o t i c e o f Appeal o f the N a t i o n a l

Post n Court F i l e No. A-394- 1 2 .

3. Attached h e r e t o as E x h i b i t " B " s a copy o f the N o t i c e o f Appeal o f R i c h a r d Warman

i n Court F i l e No. A-395- 1 2 .

4. Attached h e r e t o as E x h i b i t " C " s a copy o f the Order o f Mr. J u s t i c e P e l l e t i e r , dated

December 18, 2012.



DS

- 2 -

5. I am dvised by Jason Beitchman, counsel t o the N a t i o n a l P o s t , a nd b e l i e v e t h a t ,

d e s p i t e the f a c t t h a t the N a t i o n a l Post wa s n a m e d a s a n a p p l i c a n t i n the a p p l i c a t i o n i n

Court F i l e No. T-784- 1 1 ( t h e " A p p l i c a t i o n " ) , the N a t i o n a l Post had no knowledge t h a t the

A p p l i c a t i o n ha d been c o m m e n c e d , w a s never served w i t h a ny o f the d o c u m e n t s i n the

proceeding ( i n c l u d i n g the o r i g i n a t i n g p r o c e s s ) , a nd had no knowledge o f the A p p l i c a t i o n

u n t i l a f t e r ju dgment wa s i s s u e d . T h e N a t i o n a l Post d i d n o t submit a ny evidence or

a r g u m e n t i n the A p p l i c a t i o n a nd d i d n o t a p p e a r a t the h e a r i n g o f the A p p l i c a t i o n .

6. I am advised by Mr. Beitchman, a nd b e l i e v e , t h a t a f t e r l e a r n i n g o f the judgment,

the N a t i o n a l Post i n s t r u c t e d counsel t o commence he appeal i n Court F i l e No. A-394- 1 2 .

7. I h a v e reviewed the Court Index a nd Docket on the Federal Court website i n

respect o f appeals A-394-12 and A-395- 1 2 . B y A p r i l 23, 2013, l l p a r t i e s ha d d e l i v e r e d

memorandum f f a c t a nd law on the m e r i t s i n b o t h appeals, n accordance w i t h the order

o f Mr. J u s t i c e P e l l e t i e r .

SWORN BEFORE ME t the C i t y o f

Toronto, i n the Province o f O n t a r i o on

May 3, 2013.

~Cc,c.~~S1F%C~C

Co mmis s io a k i n g A f f i d a v i t s ' ( S i g n a t u r e of deponent)

(or a s h e s e m a y b e )

~\~~ ~ r T Z ~ i " ' - -





This i s E x h i b i t "A" r e f e r r e d t o i n the A f f i d a v i t o f C a i t l i n

R u s s e l l , sworn May 3, 2013

Commissioner o r (or as maybe)



A - 3 ° i ~ + - Z

C o u r t F i i e No.

FEDERALCOURTOFAPPEAL

.HARD WARMAN nd NATIONAL.POSTCOMPANY

- and -

MARK FOURNIER and CONSTANCE FOURNIER

NOTICE OFAPPEAL

TOTHE RESPONDENT:

A p p e l l a n t s

Respondents

A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by t h e

a p p e l l a n t , t h e N a t i o n a l Post Company t h e " N a t i o n a l P o s t" ) . The e l i e f c l a i m e d by t h e

a p p e l l a n t appears on t h e f o l l o w i n g page.

THIS APPEAL i l l b e h e a r d b y t h e C o u r t a t a t i m e and p l a c e t o b e i x e d by t h e

J u d i c i a l A d m i n i s t r a t o r . Unless h e C o u r t i r e c f i s o t h e r w i s e , t h e p l a c e o f h e a r i n g w i l l b e as

r e q u e s t e d by t h e a p p e l l a n t . The a p p e l l a n t r e q u e s t s t h a t t h i s appeal b e h e a r d a t t h e

F e d e r a l Court o f Appeal n T o r o n t o .

I F YOU WISH TO OPPOSE THIS APPEAL, o r e c e i v e n o t i c e o f any s t e p i n t h e

appeal o r t o b e e r v e d w i t h any documents n t h e a p p e a l , you o r a o l i c i t o r a c t i n g f o r you

must r e p a r e a n o t i c e o f appearance n Form 341 p r e s c r i b e d by h e Federal o u r t s Rules

and serve t on t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s s o l i c i t o r , o r where h e a p p e l l a n t i s s e l f - r e p r e s e n t e d , on t h e

a p p e l l a n t , WITHIN 10 DAYS f b e i n g s e r v e d w i t h t h i s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l .



- 2 -

I F YOU INTEND TOSEEK A DIFFERENT DISPOSITION o f t h e o r d e r a p p e a l e d

from, yo u must serve and i l e a n o t i c e o f c r o s s-appeal n Form 341 p r e s c r i b e d b y t h e

Federal o u r t s Rules n s t e a d o f s e r v i n g and i l i n g a n o t i c e o f appearance.

Copies f t h e Federal o u r t s R u l e s , i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e l o c a l o f f i c e s o f i h e

Court and o t h e r necessary n f o r m a t i o n m ay be o b t a i n e d o n r e q u e s t t o t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r

o f t h i s Court t Ottawa t e l e p h o n e 61 3-992-4238) r a t any o c a l o f f i c e .

I F YOU FAIL TO OPPOSE THIS APPEAL,JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN I N

YOUR ABSENCEAND WITHOUTFURTHER NOTICE TOYOU.

D a t eS E P Z l 2 0 1 2

~ l ( A . G G ~ ~ ; l L ~ ~ U

I s s u e d by~ c : ~ ~ ' r ' ~ ~ u c : i ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~

(Re s t r y O f f i c e r )

Address f

l o c a l o f f i c e : 1 8 0 Q u e e n S t r e e t West

S u i t e 200

Toronto, n f i a r i o

M5V L6

TO: BRAZEAU SELLER LLP

B a r r i s t e r s and S o l i c i t o r s

55 e t c a l f e S t r e e t

S u i t e 750

Ottawa ON K1P L5

James atz

T e l : 613.237.4000 x t . 267

Fax: 613.237.4001

S o l i c i t o r s f o r the p p l i c a n t ,

RichardWarman

ANDTO: MARK FOURNIER

20Q0 n i t y Road


Res p ond e nt



~C~

AND TO: CONSTANCEFOURNIER

2000 U n i t y Road


Respondent



APPEAL

THE APPELLANT APPEALS i o t h e F e d e r a l Court o f Appeal from t h e Judgment

o f the Honourable Mr. J u s t i c e Douglas Rennie d a t e d June 21, 2012, by which t h e Court

dismissed the A p p l i c a t i o n and d e t e r m i n e d , a m o n g o t h e r t h i n g s , t h a t :~ ~/ V

(a) the r e p r od u c t i o n o f e x c e r p t s o f an a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d "Jonathan Kay o n R i c h a r d

Wa r m a n and Canada's Phony-Racism I n d u s t r y " , which w a s a u t h o r e d by

Jonathan Kay as an employee o f t h e N a t i o n a l Post f i h e "Kay Wo rk" ) , d i d

n o t c o n s t i t u t e t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n o f a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t o f t h a t w ork and

t h e r e f o r e w a s n o t an i n f r i n g e m e n t o f c o p y r i g h t p u r s u a n t t o s u b s e c t i o n s 3 ( 1 )

and 27(1) f t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t , R . S . C . , 1985, . C-42 t h e " A c Y ' ) ; and

(b) even f the reproduced e x c e r p t s o f t h e Kay Work am oun ted t o a s u b s t a n t i a l

p a r t o f the wo rk, t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ' r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e e x c e r p t c o n s t i t u t e s

f a i r d e a l i n g f o r t h e purpose o f ne w s r e p o r t i n g p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 29.2 o f t h e

Act and t h e r e f o r e d i d n o t i n f r i n g e c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Kay Work.

THE APPELLANTASKS h a t :

1 . Th e appeal be a l l o w e d and t h a t t h i s Honourable Court o r d e r t h a t :

(a) the respondents' u se o f t h e e x c e r p t s o f t h e Kay Work c o n s t i t u t e s

r e p r o d u c t i o n o f a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t o f t h a t work w i t h i n t h e meaning o f

s u b s e c t i o n 3(1) f t h e A c t ;



-2-

(b) the respondents n f r i n g e d c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Kay Work, o n t r a r y t o s u b s e c t i o n

27(1) of t h e A c t , b o t h by r e p r o d u c i n g t h e f u l l t e x t o f t h e work an d by

r e p r o d u c i n g t h e e x c e r p t s o f t h e work;

(c) the respondents' use o f t h e Kay W o r k w as o t a i r d e a l i n g f o r the purposes

o f n e w s r e p o r t i n g and t h e r e f o r e d o e s n o t q u a l i f y f o r t h e e x c e p t i o n from

c o p y r i g h t i n f r i n g e m e n t i n s e c t i o n 29.2 f t h e A c t ;

(d ) the a p p e l l a n t s a r e e n t i t l e d t o s t a t u t o r y da mage s f o r i n f r i n g e m e n t o f

c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Kay Work;

(e ) the respondents r em o v e the p o s t i n g o f t h e Kay W o r k rom t h e i r w e b s i t e an d

be n j o i n e d from u r t h e r p u b l i s h i n g the e x c e r p t o f the Kay Work;

( f l the respondents pay t o the a p p e l l a n t s t h e c o s t s o f t h i s appeal and o f t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n ; an d

(g) the a p p e l l a n t s be g r a n t e d such f u r t h e r an d o t h e r r e l i e f as h i s Honourable

Court d e e m s u s t .

THEGROUNDSOF APPEAL re as o l l o w s :

I . Overvi ew

2. Postmedia Networks n c . , which i s the successor c o r p o r a f i i o n t o t h e N a t i o n a l Post

( c o l l e c t i v e l y r e f e r r e d t o as N a t i o n a l Post" ) , i s t h e s o l e o w n e r f c o p y r i g h t i n the Kay Work.

I t holds n o c o p y r i g h t i n t e r e s t i n t h e o t h e r f i n r o works a t i s s u e i n t h e c o u r t b e l o w . Th e

N a t i o n a l P o s t ' s i n t e r e s t i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g i s r e s t r i c t e d t o a d d r e s s i n g t h e c o r r e c t



~_3_

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the C o p y r i g h t Act as t a p p l i e s t o a l l e g e d i n f r i n g e m e n t o f c o p y r i g h t i n t h e

Kay Work. t takes no p o s i t i o n on t h e d i s p u t e between Mr. Warman and t h e r e s p o n d e n t s .

3 . On anuary 13, 2010, h e N a t i o n a l Post g r a n t e d an e x c l u s i v e l i c e n c e t o c o p y r i g h t

i n the Kay Work o Mr. Warman.

4. I n A p r i l 2010, Mr. Warman d i s c o v e r e d t h a t the u l l t e x t o f the Kay Work had been

reproduced on the r e s p o n d e n t s ' w e b s i t e , www.freedominion.com(Free Dominion" )

5. On p r i l 16, 2010, Mr. Warman demanded t h a t t h e respondents remove t h e Kay

Work, and the respondents d i d so. However, a f t e r t a k i n g down t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e

e n t i r e work, the respondents r e p l a c e d i t by p o s t i n g e x c e r p t s o f t h e Kay Work on Free

Dominion.

6. Mr. Warman and the N a t i o n a l Post then commenced the a p p l i c a t i o n b e l o w ,

c l a i m i n g damages f o r c o p y r i g ht i n f r i n g e m e n t i n the Kay Work a r i s i n g from t h e

r e p r o d u c t i o n of the p o s t e d e x c e r p t s .

7. Th e u l l t e x t o f the Kay Work c o n s i s t s o f t h e h e a d l i n e and 11 p a r a g r a p h s . Th e Free

Dominion website reproduced t h e h e a d l i n e o f the r t i c l e , t h r e e complete p a r a g r a p h s , an d

p a r t o f a o u r t h paragraph.

8. I n the view o f the a p p l i c a t i o n j u d g e , t h e r e was no i n f r i n g e m e n t o f c o p y r i g h t i n t h e

Kay Work.



1

-4-

9. F i r s t , he determined t h a t " t h e respondents d i d n o t reproduce a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t o f

the Kay Wo rk"an d h a t t h e r e f o r e t h e r e was n o n f r i n g e m e n t o f t h e a p p l i c a n t s r i g h t s under

s u b s e c t i o n 3(1) f the A c t .

10. Seco nd, he found t h a t , even f t h e reproduced p o r t i o n s o f t h e Kay Wo rk amounted

t o a u b s t a n t i a l p a r t , s u ch r e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e d " f a i r d e a l i n g f o r t h e purposes o f news

r e p o r t i n g " pursuant o s e c t i o n 29.2 o f t h e A c t .

11. I n the N a t i o n a l P o s t s v i e w , these f i n d i n g s c o n s t i t u t e s i g n i f i c a n t e r r o r s o n t h e p a r t

of the a p p l i c a t i o n judge.As

e s c r i b e d below, h i s appeal a i s e s i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s about

the c o r r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n o f s e c t i o n s 3 ( 1 ) , 27(1) and 29.2 o f t h e A c t .

I I . The Res p o n d e n t s R e p r o d u c e d a Substantial Part of the Kay W o r k

12. Th e Cour t e r r e d b y f a i l i n g t o conclude t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ' r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e

e n t i r e Kay W o r k i n f r i n g e d c o p y r i g h t i n t h a t work.

13. Th e Cour t e r r e d f u r t h e r by c o n c l u d i n g t h a t t h e respondents d i d n o t reproduce a

" s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t " o f the Kay W o rk b y p o s t i n g t h e e x c e r p t s a t i s s u e o n t h e i r w e b s i t e . I n s o

f i n d i n g , t h e Cour t e r r e d b y :

( a) f i n d i n g t h a t a q u a n t i t y o f " l e s s than h a l f o f t h e work" — s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e

h e a d l i n e , t h r e e complete p a r a g r a p h s , an d p a r t o f a f o u r t h p a r a g r a p h from

an a r t i c l e c o m p r i s i n g a h e a d l i n e and 11 paragraphs i n t o t a l — i s n o t a

s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t o f a work;



4~

(b) a r b i t r a r i l y f i n d i n g i n paragraph 26 t h a t " i t appears [Warman] sought t h e

e x c l u s i v e l i c e n c e t o t h e Kay Wor k n o r d e r t o p r e v e n t i t s f u r t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n , "

which f i n d i n g i s u n s u p p o r t a b l e on t h e e v i d e n c e ;

(c) c o n c l u d i n g t h a t t h e Ka y Wo r k w a s n o t e x c e r p t e d t o "save t i m e a nd f f o r t , "

which c o n c l u s i o n i s a r b i t r a r y a nd unsupported by h e e v i d e n c e ; a nd

(d) i n c o r r e c t l y c h a r a c t e r i z i n g t h e e x c e r p t a s a paraphrase o f t h e Ka y Work,

w h e n o n l y a s m a l l p o r t i o n o f t h e e x c e r p t w a s a c t u a l l y paraphrased, and

i g n o r i n g t h e f a c t t h a t , a s a reasonable a l t e r n a t i v e t o r e p r o d u c i n g t h e

e x c e r p t , t h e respondents c o u l d h a ve r e s t a t e d t h e u n d e r l y i n g i d e a s o f t h e

Kay. o r k n t h e i r o w n words.

1 1 1 . Th e R e p r odu c t i on was No t a i r Dealing for the P u r p o s e of News eporting

14. Th e Court r r e d i n d e t e r m i n i n g , n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , t h a t t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s

f a i r d e a l i n g f o r t h e purposes o f ne ws e p o r t i n g .

15. S p e c i f i c a l l y , the Court r r e d i n f i n d i n g t h a t t h e s t a t u t o r y p r e -c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e news

r e p o r t i n g e x c e p t i o n , which r e q u i r e t h a t t h e source a nd t h e a u t h o r o f t h e wo rk be named,

w e r e me t w h e n n f a c t the n e i t h e r t h e source t h e N a t i o n a l Post) o r t h e a u t h o r (Jonathan

Kay) w e r e r e f e r e n c e d i n t h e i n f r i n g i n g r e p r o d u c t i o n .

16. F u r t h e r , i n c o n s i d e r i n g whether t h e d e a l i n g w a s f a i r " , t h e Court e r r e d i n i t s

a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e f a i r n e s s f a c f i o r s b y :



► s

(a) d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t t h e purpose o f the d e a l i n g was o r news r e p o r t i n g when

t h a t f i n d i n g was c o n t r a r y t o t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s a d m i s s i o n on

cross-examination t h a t t h e purpose o f t h e d e a l i n g was t o " c r i t i q u e " M r .

Warman's c t i v i t i e s ; ,

(b) d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t the amount f t h e d e a l i n g was v e r y l i m i t e d " and t h a t t h i s

favoured a f i n d i n g o f f a i r n e s s , when i n f a c t t h e a mo un t o f t h e work

reproduced was u b s t a n t i a l and s t r o n g l y f a v o u r s a i n d i n g t h a t a d e a l i n g i s

u n f a i r ;

(c) f a i l i n g t o c o n s i d e r the n a t u r e o f the work, which i f c o n s i d e r e d would have

supported a i n d i n g o f u n f a i r n e s s ; and

(d) f a i l i n g t o f i n d the d e a l i n g u n f a i r , d e s p i t e i t s f i n d i n g s t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s t o

the d e a l i n g and f i h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e d e a l i n g f a v o u r e d a f i n d i n g o f

u n f a i r n e s s ;

17. Th e Federal Court Rules, Rul e 335;

18. Th e Federal Cou►ts c t , s e c t i o n 27;

19. Th e C o p y r i g h t A c t , R . S . C . , 1985, . C- 4 2 , s e c t i o n s 3 , 27, and 2 9 . 2 .

Se p te mbe r 20, 2 0 1 2 CASSELS B RO C F~ BLACKWELL LP

, ~ ~ f _ 2 1 0 0 c o t i a Plaza

40 i n g S t r e e t We s t

T o r o n t o , ON M5H 3C2

Casey M. h i s i c k LSUC : 46572R



~~7-

T e l : 416.869.5403

Fax: 416.644.9326c c h i s i c k @casselsbrock.com


T e l : 416.860.2988

F a x : 647.259.7993j b e i t c h m a n @casselsbrock.com

S o l i c i t o r s f o r t h e A p p e l l a n t ,




i ~

Court i l e No .

FEDERALCOURTOFAPPEAL

BETWEEN:

RICHARD WARMAN nd

NATIONAL POSTCOMPANYA p p e l l a n t

-and -

MARK FOURNIER nd

CONSTANCEFOURNIERRespondent

NOTICE OFAPPEAL

Cassels Br ock &Blackwell LLPB a r r i s t e r s & S o l i c i t o r s

S c o t i a P l a z a , S u i t e 2100

40 i n g S t r e e t West

T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o , M5H3C2

C a s ey M. h i s i c k LSUC : 46572R

T e l : 416.869.5403

Fax: 416.644.9326cc h s i c [email protected]


T e l : 416.860.2988

Fax: 647.259.7993j b e i t c h m a n @casselsbrock.com


N a t i o n a l Post C o m p a n y



k"



This s E x h i b i t "B" r e f e r r e d t o i n the A f f i d a v i t o f C a i t l i n R u s s e l l

sworn May 3, 2013

Commissioner o r Ta~/ig A f f i d a v i t s (or a s maybe)



i

E 3 ~ t 'W V :

Court F i l e No. A- ~ j ~ L ~ , ~ ~ ~ j

FEC1~~Al. C 7 U f ~ ' ~ OFAPP~A~

F2FCMARD WARMAN nd N~TIQNAL Pf~ST COM('ANY

I I A A C ~ K F'C)URNI~R and CONS'TANCE OURNIEf~

'f~N~~N~"S:

NOTICE 7F APPEAL,

/ ~ p p ~ i l a n t s

F 2 e s p o n d ~ i 7 t s

A , ~ ( 3 A ~ . pRC1C~EDINC HA$ ~ ~ ~ N ~CIMMENGED AG,AIMV~T YOU by t l 7 e

~ p p e l l a ~ i t , Richard W s ~ r r r » r t ( t h e " A p p e l l a n ~ ' ~ . Th e r e l i e f claimed by t h e A p p e l l a n t

appears r s the o ( I n w i r r c ~ page.

THIS APP~A,~. i l l b e heard by the Courk ~ k ~ i t t t ~ and p l a c e t o k ~ e f i x e r s t t i y t i y a

J u d i o i ~ l / ~ d r r ~ f r ~ i s t r a t o r . Unless the Court d f ~ a c t ~ o t h e r u v i s e , the p l a c e o f h e ~ r i n ~ w i l l b~

a~ requested by the a p p e l l a n t . Th y a p p e i l a n f i requests t h a t t h i s appQ~l b~ heard a t t h e

F ' e d a r a l Court of Appeal i n Ottawa.

#F YOU l~hl T4 ~PPOSE THIS APP~AI., o r e c e i v e n o t i c e o f any stun i r e t 1 7 ~

appeal or t o t ~ ~ ~erv~~ w i t h any doaum~nts n t 1 i ~ appeal, you o r r ~ s o l i c : i t ~ r a c t i n g f a r

yo u m u s t p r ~ ~ c ~ r e a o t i c e o f Appearance i n F o r m 3 A ~ 9 p r e s c r i b e d by i h ~ ~odQr~l courts

Rubs end nerve i t o n the a p p e l i ~ n t ' s s o l i c i t o r , or w h ere the a p ~ ~ i l a r i t i s s e l f



- 2 ~

r ~ p ~ e s ~ t 7 t P d , an t h e a p p e l l a n t , WITHIN 10 BAYS f b e i n g s~nred w i t h t h i s n o t i c e o f

app~~i.

I f ~ YDU NT'~N~ T C 7 SEEKb IF~~~tENT DI~pC131TiOM o f t h e o r d a r ~~pealed

from, you r n u s t setae e nd i l e ~ a t i G e o f c t ' ~ a s -a p p a l n Farm X49 p r ~ u G r i b c ~ d by t h e

J ~ e d e r a t courts Rules n s t ~ e d o f s ~ n r i n g e nd i i i n g a t p t i c e a ~ F a~pearanrp.

Gopie~ ~ ~ F t h e Federal G o u r f s R u l e s , i n f o r m a t i o n ~pnceming t h e I o c a 1 a f i ~ c ~ a o f

t l i ~ Courk and o t h e r necessa~r i n f o r m a t i o n m ay be o b t a i r t a d nn r ~ q u e s # f a t h e

A d m i n i s t r a t o r of h i s Court E Otk~wa t e l e p h a n e 813-9~2~4238) r t any r ~ c a l ~ f f f ~ e .

I ~ YOU ~ A l L TO CfP~'OSE YH~~ APPEAL., JUDGIVI~NT MAY ~C GIVEN {N

' 1 F ' t 7 U F t A~3~~NCE ~ ► , N p iNiTHC?UT ~URTH~R t ~ T I ~ G E T4 C1U.

s' Y ~ r ' ~ ' E`'~ ~ P , ~ ? t ~ ~ 7

D 8 ► t e I s s u e d by , ~ . < : ; ' ~ ~ , I ~ , ; ' ~ i ~ ~ ~ . ~ a , ~ ~ ~ , ~ , L : : c ? ~ "

( f i e ~ i s t r y ( ~ f f i c c ~ r )

Address f

l o c a l ~ f F i c ~ : Tomas ' A r c y McGee ~ ~ i l d i n g

9 0 Sparks t r e e t , t h F l o o r

Ottawa,ONKIA l - f 9



a ~

_ ~ _

T C J : ~NSS~L,S I~RQC{C~ iLACKVIfELL L I , P

21 UO c o t i a I ~ l a ~ a

4a < i r ► g s t r e e t west

Taranto, 3 N M5H3C2

C~s~y M. h i a ( c k ~ , $ U C : #: 465728

T e l : d . 9 C ~ . 8 ~ 9 . 5 4 Q 3

Fax: 4 1 ( 3 . t ~ ~ A ~ . ~ ~ 2 ~

o o h i s i c k ~ c a s a e l s b r a ~ k , c o m

Jason Beitcliman LuUC :5~4i70

Tel. ~16.8G0.?~88

~ ' a x : 647.26.?99~j b Q i t ~ c h m a n ~ c a n ~ e ~ I s b r a c k , o m

~ r ~ ( i a i t a r s f o r the N a t i o n a l Post o r ~ n p a n y

ANQTO' 1 1 l ~ A R F C ~DURNI~fZ,

200q U n i t y R n a d

Eiglnb~~ 7 ~ J KOH I Q

R o s ~ a n d e t ~ t t

A ~ N I : ? TD: ~t~NSTANC~ fxUF~N1~R

2 1 ~ O Q L . l n i ~ r f ~ a a d

~ ( g i n b u r g ON K QH NU

Respondent



~ 4 -

ApP~AI,

THE ~ ' F ' ~ L . L . A N T ,ApPEAL,S t o t h e F e d e r a l C o u r t d f ~ppoal r o m t h e Jud~m~nt

o f t h e Hnnour~bl~ M r . l u s t i c e a a u g l a s R~nni~ d a t e d Jung 1 , X 0 1 2 , b y w h i c h t h e G o u r k

d i s t n i s ~ ~ d t h c ~ f l p p e ( t a n t ' s a p p l i c a t i o n a n d dotermine~, n t e r e l l s , l ~ a t ;

(~) the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f e x c e r p t s of a n a r k i c l ~ e n t i t l e d "Jonathan Ka y a n

R l c h ~ r c ! W r ~ r r n ~ r ~ t a r T d G a n a c l a ' s Phony-f ? a o l s m I n d u s t r y ' , w h i r t ~ wa s

authored b y Jonathan Ka y ~S ~n em~layoe of the N ~ t i o n ~ l ~ ' t ~ s f i c o m p a n y

( t 1 7 ~ "K~y Work" ) , d f d not c o n s t i t u t e the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f a u l 7 s t a ► ~ t i a l p e r t

of fh~t work a n d t h e r ~ f Q r e wa s not ~n i n f r i n ~ e m ~ n t of a ~ p y r i ~ { 7 t p u r s u a n f i

10 ~ub~~c# i o n s 3(1) an d 27(1) of the Copyright A c f , R . S . C . , 19 5, c . C-~z

(thy"Act" ) ~

(b ) e u a n f the reproduced e X c e r p t s of the I C ~ y W a n k wa s t s ► ~ b s t a n t i a l d a r t o f

the work, t h Q re~pande t s ' r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e e x c o r ~ t c o n s t i t w t e s f a i r

d e a l i n g f o r t h e purpose o f n ews r e p o r t i n g p u r s u a n t t o s ~ c l i o n 29.2 o f t h e

Ap t e n d t i l e r f o r e d i d n o t i n f r i n g e t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Ke y

Work; a n d

(c) t h s ~ t 4he ~ l p p a i l a n t ' s c l a i m f a r c o p y r ~ g h f i n f r i n g e m e n t r e g a r d i n g t h e

r e s p r n d e ~ n t s ' r e p r a d u c k i o t t o f t h e e n # i r e a r t i c l e ~ n t i t l e c f "Max imum

, ~ 7 l s r u p t l o r ~ : S t o ~ a p l r 7 g IVeo-Nazis By (A/mosfJ Any M~~~as N ~ : c c ~ s ~ ~ r y " ,

w S ~ i c h way ~uthar~d b y the A p p ~ l l ~ n t (thy"Warman l l o r k" ) , wa s s t a t u t e

barred, p u r g u ~ a n k to tho e x p i r y of the i m i t a t i o n p e r f a c l s e t a u f f n S e c t i o n A ~ 1

c ~ ~ F t h e ~ ~ f i .



a3

. ~ _

TF#~ A f ' P ~ ~ , ~ „ A , N T ASKS h e t :

1 . T h c ~ appeal b~ i l n w e : r f end l t i a t t h i s H o n c ~ u r a b l ~ Court r d e r t h a t :

(a) t r i g respondents i n f r i n g e d c o p y r i g h t i n t ~ ~ e l C ~ y Work, c s ~ n t r ~ r y t o

s R a b s a c t i i o n t ~ ( ~ ) o f t h e A c f , b o t h by r e p r o d u c i n g t h e f u l l t e x t c i f t h e w r ~ r k

~ r ► d by ~ p r a d u c i n g f i h e ~ x c ~ r p t s of h e w o r k ;

(b) f i h e r e s p o n d e n t s ' u se o f ~ I ~ e c ~ x c e r p t s o f t h e Kay W c ~ r l c c o n s t i k u t e s

r e p t c ~ d u c t i a n o f a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t o f ~ h ~ t work w i t h i n fhe meaning o f

s u b s ~ p t i o n ~ ( 1 ) of h e A c k ;

(c) the r e s p ~ n d e ~ n t s ' u se of t h e Ke y Wvrk w ~ ~ n o t f a i r d ~ ~ t l i n g f o r t h e

p u r p t ~ s e s of nPw~ r e p c ~ r k i n g end t h e r e f o r e c ~ o e ~ n o t q u a l i f y f o r t l 7 e

e x c e p t i o n from c o p y r i g h t i n f r i n g e m e n t I n s e c t i o n 29.2 ~ t h e A c c t ;

(d} the r e s p n n d ~ r ~ t s I n f r i n g e d c a p y r k ~ h # i n t h e W c ~ r m a i i Work, c o n t r a r y t o

s u b ~ e a t f c a n 2 7 ( 1 } a F t h e A c t , by r e p e a t e d { y and c a n t i r i u o u s l ~ r e p r o d u c i n g

t h r : u l l ~ c ~ x t o f t h a W a r m a n N a r k ;

(e) the A p p ~ l l t ~ n t i s a n t i# i e d f i o s ~ a t u t a r y damages n r i n f r i n g ~ m ~ n t o f c a p y r f g r i t

i n the Ke y W o r k and the W a r m a n Wark;

(~ the r~s~~ndents be h j a i n e d from f u r t h e r p u b i i s h f n g t h e Kay W a r k and t h e

Warman

t ~ r k ;



ay

- ~ ~

(g) the r ~ s p o r ~ d ~ ~ n t s pay r y t h e A p p e l l a n t h i s c a ~ t a o f t l 7 i s a p p e a l end ~ f t h e y

a p p l i c a t i o n , ~ ~ n d

( I 7 ) the A p p e l l ~ n f i be g r a n t e d s « e t ~ f u r f i h e r and o ~ l i e ~ r r e l i e f ~s t h i s Honourably

CUUrt d e e r r 7 : ~ j u s t .

THE~F~aUNaS A F ,A,pp~AL a r e as e l l o w s :

2. " fhe l o n o ~ i r a b l e Mr. u s t i r , . ~ Rennie e r r e d i i i f a c t and n I~w n f a i l i n g t o conclude

t h a t t h e r e s ~ i o n d ~ n t s ' i r 7 i t i a l r ~ p r o d u c t i a n o f the e r ~ t i r ~ Kay W a r i < f ~ i f r i n g ~ d c o p y r i g h t i n

t h a t work,

3. Th e H c ~ n a u r ~ b l ~ Mr. J u s t i c e : F 2 ~ n n 1 ~ ~ r r ~ d I n f a e ~ and I n law I n f i r 7 d i n g t i ~ a t t h c ~

respondents d i d not r ~ p r c ~ c l u c e a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t of t h e Kay W o r k and t h a t t h e r e f a r ~

#here w a s n ~ n f r i n g ~ m ~ i i ~ c a f t h a t work R u r s u a n t t o s u b s ~ o ~ i ~ n 3(1) f t h e A p t .

~. Th e HanQ~rable Mr. u s t i c e Rennie e r r e d i n f a c t and i n law n f i n d i n g t h a t , even f

the re~r~duced p o i - ~ I n n : ~ o f t h e Kay Wark had ~maunted t o a s u b s t ~ n t i ~ l p e r t , such

r e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t ~ c ~ B a l i • d e a l i n g f o r t h e purposes o f n e w s r e p a c k i n g p ~ r ~ u a n t t o

Suction 2y.2 of h y : A c t .

5 . T I ~ ~ h l a r ~ o u r ~ b l e Mr. J u s t i c e Bennie e r r e d i n t a c k and i n law i n f i i 7 d i n g f h a k t h e

~ 0 . p p ~ l l a n t ' s c l ~ ( ~ r i o f a a ~ y r i g h t i n f r i n g e m e n t o f t h e Wa rm a n W o r k w as e n t i r o l y s t a t u t e

b a r r e d , p ~ ~ r s u a n t t o S e ~ ; t i o n ~1 o f t h e A c t . i n p a r t i c u l a r , Mr. J ~ s t i c e Bennie f a i l e d t o

CGnclude t h a t the c ~ n f i i n u o u s and r e p e a ~ t ~ d r ~ p r o c ~ u a t i a n c ► f t h e W~r~7»n Work an f i n e

r e s p ~ i 7 d c ~ n t s ' u v e b ~ i t e t h r c ~ u g h a u t t h e t h r ~ @- y e a r p ~ r i d d i m m e d i a t e l y p r i o r t c ~ t h e



as

- ' l -

A p p e l l a n t ' s c i a i r n f o r i h f r i n g ~ : r n ~ n ~ t o f t l t ~ t work brought t h a t p o r t i o n o f t h e c i c ~ i r n w i t h i n

the s t a t u t o i ~ f i i r t i t a t i c a n p ~ r l o d y e t o u t I n S ~ c t l o n 41 of he A c t .

6. such f ~ i t t l 7 e r and o t l i o r grounds as Counsel ma y a d v i s e and i ~ ~ i s I - i a n a u r a b l ~

Court may a r m i f i .

7. Th e =e d e r + ~ 1 Caur#s ~ u l e s , Rule 335;

~ . Th e =ad~r~l ~purfs c f , s c a c t i o n 27;

9. Th e Ca~yrlghtAct, . S . C . , 9~8~, . G~42, ~ o t ( o n s 3, Z7, X8.2 and 4~ .

S~pfiember 2~ , 2U12 ~RAUSELL,~R.LL,P

7 ~ a-55 M e t c a l f e S# t e a t

ottAwa, n t ~ r l o

K1P ~ . 5

James K a t z L . S U C # : ~~046KT e l : G13-2 3 7-40U0 e xt 6 ' T

Fax: @1 -2 3 7-4001

S o l i c i t o r s f o r tha A p p e l l a n t ,

R i c h a r d Warman





This i s E x h i b i t "C" r e f e r r e d t o i n the A f f i d a v i t o f C a i t l i n

R u s s e l l sworn May 3, 2013 ,,

Commissioner o r Taking (or a s maybe)



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~rX

Ottawa, n t a r i o , December 8, 012

P r e s e n t : PELLETIER . A .

BETWEEN:

~ r

~~

~ ' f ~ ~ ~ t r ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ e 1 ~ ~ e ~ ~ r ~ Z ~

RICHARllWARMAN nd

NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

and

MARK OUI2NIER and

CONSTANCEFOURNIER

ORDER

Date: 0121218

Docket: A-394-12

A p p e l l a n t s

Respondents

WHEREAS y i r e c t i o n d a t e d November 21, 012, h e C o u r t a s k e d t h e p a r t i e s f o r t h e i r

c o r n r n e n t s a s t o w hy h e Court h o u l d n o t make h e o r d e r p r o p o s e d i n t h a t d i r e c t i o n : and

WHEREAS h e p a r t i e s ' s u b m i s s i o n s h a v e been e c e i v e d and o n s i d e r e d ;



Page :2

NOW HEREFORE T IS HEREBYORDEREDTHAT:

1) Th e m o t i o n s t o d i s m i ss a p p e a l s A-394-1 2 and A-395-1 2 r e d i s m i s s e d . P u r s u a n t t o Rule 3 ( 2 ) ,

t h e f o l l o w i n g o r d e r s a r e made:

2) Th e a p p e a l s i n f i l e s A-394-12 and A-395-1 2 h a l l be o n s o l i d a t e d .

3) The p p e a l i n i l e A-394-12 h a l l b e c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e l e a d a p p e a l ' a n d i l e A-395-12 h a l l be

c o n s i d e r e d t h e r e l a t e d a p p e a l .

4} Th e t y l e of a u s e i n any u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s s h a l l b e t h e s t y l e of a u s e i n f i l e A-394-12 and

s h a l l b e a r t h e d o c k e t numbers A-394-12 and A-395- 1 2 .

5} On e p p e a l b ook s h a l l be p r e p a r e d c o n t a i n i n g t h e m a t e r i a l f o r b o t h a p p e a l s . There h a l l be one

a g r e e m e n t a s t o t h e c o n t e n t s of h e a p p e a l bo o k w h i c h s h a l l be s e r v e d and f i l e d i n t h e l e a d a p p e a l

and i n t h e r e l a t e d a p p e a l w i t h i n 21 d a y s o f t h e d a t e of h i s o r d e r , a i l i n g w h i c h a m o t i o n t o s e t t l e t h e

c o n C e n t s o f t h e a p p e a l bo o k s h a l l be e r v e d a n d f i l e d w i C h i n a f u R h e r 1Q d a y s .

6} S i x c o p i e s o f t h e a p p e a l book, nd any t h e r documents o b e s e r v e d and i l e d , s h a l l b e f i l e d

w i t h i n t h i r t y days f t e r t h e l a t e r of h e i l i n g o f t h e a g r e e m e n t a s t o t h e c o n t e n t s of h e a p p e a l book,

o r t h e d a t e o f t h e o r d e r s e t t l i n g t h e c o n t e n t s of h e a p p e a l b o o k . Th e i x t h copy h a l l be p l a c e d on

t h e r e l a t e d f i l e .

7) The p p e l l a n t i n t h e l e a d a p p e a l s h i l l p r e p a r e a m e m o r a n d u m of a c t and a w , o t t o e x c e e d 30

p a g e s , d e a l i n g w i t h any c o m m o n s s u e s and t h e i s s u e s w h i c h a r e s p e c i f i c t o t h e N a t i o n a l P o s t

Company, h i c h s h a l l b e s e r v e d and i l e d w i t h i n 30 a y s of h e f i l i n g of h e a p p e a l b o o k .



Page :3

8) The p p e l l a n t i n t h e r e l a t e d appeal h a l l p r e p a r e a memorandum of rgwnent,not o exceed 15

pages e a l i n g only with h e i s s u e s which a r e s p e c i f i c t o t h e a p p e l l a n t Richard Warman, hich h a l l

be served and i l e d w i t h i n 15 days of h e d a t e of i l i n g of h e l e a d a p p e l l a n t ' s memorandum of a c t

and l a w .

9) The e s p o n d e n t s s h a l l i l e a i n g l e memorandum of a c t and law which h a l l n o t e x c e e d h i r t y

p a g e s and which h a l l be i l e d w i t h i n 30 a y s from t h e d a t e of e r v i c e on h e r e s p o n d e n t s of h e

memorandum of a c t and law n t h e r e l a t e d a p p e a l .

10) The e q u i s i t i o n f o r h e a r i n g t o g e t h e r w i t h a common book of u t h o r i t i e s i n t h e l e a d and h e

r e l a t e d a p p e a l s h a 1 1 be e r v e d and i l e d w i t h i n 20 a y s of h e d a t e of e r v i c e of h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s

memorandum of a c t and a w .

11) The e s p o n d e n t ' s book of u t h o r i t i e s s h a 1 1 be e r v e d a r ~ d f i l e d w i t h i n 20 a y s of i l i n g of h e

r e q u i s i t i o n f o r h e a r i n g .

12) The i m e l i n e s i n t h i s o r d e r a r e p e r e m p t o r y and must be t r i c t l y c o m p l i e d w i t h . I f , f o r any

r e a s o n , an x t e n s i o n of i m e i s r e q u i r e d , h e m o t i o n s e e k i n g s u c h e x t e n s i o n must be i l e d b e f o r e t h e

e x p i r a t i o n of h e t i m e f o r d o i n g t h e a c t f o r which an x t e n s i o n of i m e i s r e q u i r e d .

13) The o s t s of h e m o t i o n s t o d i s m i s s s h a l l be o s t s u n t h e c a u s e .

" J . D . Denis e l l e t i e r "

J . A .

a ~



3~

Court F i l e N o . : A-394-12

and A-395-12


BETWEEN:

RICHARDWARMAN nd

NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

A p p e l l a n t s

- and -

MARK FOURNIER ndCONSTANCE FOURNIER

Respondents

AFFIDAVIT OF AITLIN RUSSELL

( F i l e d t h i s 1 3 t h day o f May, 2013)

Cassels Brock &Blackwell LLP


40 i n g S t r e e t West

Toronto, ON M5H 3C2

Casey C h i s i c k LSUC : 46572R

T e l : 416.869.5403

Fax: 416.644.9326c c h i s i c [email protected]

Jason Beitchman LSUC : 564770T e l : 416.860.2988

Fax: [email protected]







BETWEEN:




A p p e l l a n t s

- and -

MARKFOURNIER nd CONSTANCE FOURNIER

Respondents

WRITTENREPRESENTATIONSOF

THE NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

(Responding Party to the CIPPIC Motion

i n Writing for Leave to Intervene)

CASSELSBROCK& LACKWELL LLP


40 ing S t r e e t W e s t

Toronto, ON M5H 3C2


T e l : 416.869.5403

Fax: 416.644.9326c c h i s i c k @casselsbrock.com


T e l : 416.860.2988

Fax: [email protected]


N a t i o n a l Post C o m p a n y

3



~ ~

TO: SAMUELSON-GLUSHKO CANADIAN INTERNET

POLICY&PUBLICINTEREST LINIC CIPPIC)

U n i v e r s i t y o f Ottawa, a c u l t y o f Law,

Common La w S e c t i o n

57 o u i s Pasteur S t r e e t

Ottawa ON K1 N 6N5

David F e w e r LSUC :45307C

T e l : 613.562.5800, x t . 2558

Fax: 613.562.5417

S o l i c i t o r s f o r the Proposed I n t e r v e n e r

AND TO: BRAZEAUSELLER LLP

B a r r i s t e r s and S o l i c i t o r s

55 e t c a l f e S t r e e t

S u i t e 750Ottawa ON K1P L5

James Katz

T e l : 613.237.4000 x t . 2 6 7

Fax: 613.237.4001


Richard Warman

AND TO: MARK nd CONSTANCEFOURNIER

2000 n i t y R o a dE l g i n b u r g ON KOH NO

T e l : 613.929.9265

Fax: 609.379.8793

R espond ent s

3



3



BETWEEN:

RICHARDWARMAN nd NATIONAL POSTCOMPANY

- and -

MARK FOURNIER and CONSTANCE FOURNIER

WRITTENREPRESENTATIONSOF

THE NATIONALPOSTCOMPANY

(Responding Party to the CIPPIC Motion

i n Writing for Leave to Intervene)

OVERVIEW

A p p e l l a n t s

Respondents

1 . Th e N a t i o n a l Post C ompany ( t h e "National Post" ) does n o t oppose the

motion f o r leave t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h i s appeal f i l e d by the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian

I n t e r n e t P o l i c y and P u b l i c I n t e r e s t C l i n i c(CIPPIC" )

2 . However, the N a t i o n a l Post submits t h a t t h i s Court ought t o p l a c e a p p r o p r i a t e

terms o n the n a t u r e and scope o f CIPPIC's i n t e r v e n t i o n , t o ensure t h a t , f granted leave t o

i n t e r v e n e , CIPPIC's p a r t i c i p a t i o n be l i m i t e d t o addressing issues r a i s e d by the p a r t i e s ,

and t h a t i t s r o l e remain t h a t o f an i n t e r v e n e r and n o t as quasi p a r t y .



2

PARTI-FACTS

3 . CIPPIC's motion seeks leave t o i n t e r v e n e i n t wo r e l a t e d appeals n Court i l e Nos.

A-394-12 a n d A-395-12 t o g e t h e r , t h e "Appe als" ) . ' The N a t i o n a l Post i s the A p p e l l a n t i n

A-394- 1 2 . Richard Warman s the A p p e l l a n t i n the r e l a t e d appeal, A-395- 1 2 .

4. The Appeals b o t h c h a l l e n g e the R e a s o n s f o r Judgment a n d Judgment o f Mr.

J u s t i c e Douglas Rennie, dated June 21, 2012 t h e "J u dg men t" ) , 2 i n which J u s t i c e R ennie

dismissed a n A p p l i c a t i o n ( t h e "Application" ) a l l e g i n g i n f r i n g e m e n t o f c o p y r i g h t i n t h r e e

works.

5. One f these t h r e e works i s a newspaper a r t i c l e authored by Jonathan Kay, a n

e m p l o yee o f the N a t i o n a l Post ( t h e "K ay Work" ) . The N a t i o n a l Post i s the o w n e r o f

c o p y r i g h t i n the Ka y Work. Mr. Warman s t h e e x c l u s i v e l i c e n s e e o f the Ka y Work.3 The

Appeal i n A-394-12 r e l a t e s e x c l u s i v e l y t o the Ka y Work.

6. The respondents t o the Appeals, M a r k a n d Const a n ce F o u r n i e r ( t h e

" R e s p o n d e n t s" ) , operate a w e b s i t e d i s c u s s i o n f o r u m . 4 The A p p l i c a t i o n a l l e g e d t h a t t h e

K a y W o r k wa s reproduced o n the Respondents' e b s i t e w i t h o u t consent f h e ow ner r t h e

e x c l u s i v e l i c e n s e e , a n d t h e r e f o r e i n f r i n g e d c o p y r i g h t . The A p p l i c a t i o n a l l e g e d t h a t t h e

The N o t i c e o f Appeal n b o t h A-394-1 2 and A-395-12 ap pe ar a s E x h i b i t t o t h e A f f i d a v i t o f C a i t l i n R u s s e l l ,

sworn May 3, 2013(R u s s e l l A f f i d a v i t ' ) , Responding M o t i o n Record, Ta b 2(A) n d B ) .

2 Warman t l . v . F o u r n i e r , 2013 FC 03, Respon ding M o t i o n Record, Ta b 4.

3 b i d . a t p a r a . 3 .

4 b i d a t p a r a . 5 .

3\



3

Respondents' w e b s i t e p u b l i s h e d t h e Kay Work i r s t i n i t s e n t i r e t y , and then subsequently

removed t h e complete t e x t o f t h e Kay Work and r e p l a c e d i t w i t h e x c e r p t s o f t h a t w o r k . 5

7 . Mr. u s t i c eRennie d i s m i s s e d t h e A p p l i c a t i o n .

Heetermined t h a t the e x c e r p t s o f t h e

Kay Work reproduced by t h e Respondents i d n o t c o n s t i t u t e a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t " o f t h e work

c o n t r a r y t o s e c t i o n 3 nd 27 f t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t , 6 an d t h e r e f o r e t h e r e w as no i n f r i n g e m e n t .

He u r t h e r determined t h a t even f t h e reproduced p o r t i o n s o f t h e Kay Work amounted t o a

s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t , the Respondents' e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e d f a i r d e a l i n g f o r the purpose o f

n e w s e p o r t i n g , pursuant o s e c t i o n 29.2 o f t h e C o p y r i g h t Act.'

8 . While the N a t i o n a l Post was nam e d as an a p p l i c a n t i n the A p p l i c a t i o n , i t had no

knowledge t h a t the proceeding h ad b een c o m m e n c e d . Th e N a t i o n a l Post w as never

served w i t h any doc uments n the proceeding i n c l u d i n g the o r i g i n a t i n g p r o c e s s ) , and h ad

no knowledge o f the A p p l i c a t i o n u n t i l a f t e r t h e Judgment w as i s s u e d . Th e N a t i o n a l Post

d i d not submit any evidence o r argument i n the A p p l i c a t i o n and d i d n o t appear a t the

h e a r i n g o f the A p p l i c a t i o n . $

9. A f t e r l e a r n i n g o f the Judgment, he N a t i o n a l Post i n s t r u c t e d counsel t o commence

t h i s appeal, which was s s u e d on Septemb er 20, 2012. By A p r i l 23, 2013, l l p a r t i e s had

d e l i v e r e d m e m or a n d u m o f argument on the m e r i t s i n the Appeals.9

5 b i d a t p a r a . 7 .

6 . S . C . , 1985, . C- 4 2 .

I b i d a t p a r a s . 23, 24 nd 29.

$ R u s s e l l A f f i d a v i t a t p a r s . 5 , Responding M o t i o n Record, Ta b 2 .

9 R u s s e l l A f f i d a v i t a t p a r a s .6 7 , Responding M o t i o n Record, Ta b 2 .

3



4

10. Approximately 1 0 days l a t e r , o n May , 2013, CIPPIC served a motion r e c o r d i n

support of t s motion f o r leave o i n t e r v e n e i n the Appeals. CIPPIC d i d no t n t e r v e n e i n the

A p p l i c a t i o n .

PART I - POINTS N ISSUE

11. The ssue o n t h i s motion i s a s o l l o w s :

(a) I f CIPPIC i s granted leave t o i n t e r v e n e , wh at s the a p p r o p r i a t e scope a nd

nature o f such i n t e r v e n t i o n ?

PART I I - SUBMISSIONS

12. Rule 109(3) of the Federal Court Rules10 provides the Court w i t h the d i s c r e t i o n t o

place terms and c o n d i t i o n s o n the r o l e o f a n i n t e r v e n e r a s may be a p p r o p r i a t e i n the

circumstances of a p a r t i c u l a r c a s e . ~ ~ Indeed, t i s no t uncommon o r the Court o a t t a c h

terms i n c l u d i n g l i m i t s o n the issues t h a t a n i n t e r v e n e r may address, the l e n g t h of the

memorandum o f f a c t a nd law t h a t a n i n t e r v e n e r may i l e a nd the time a l l o c a t e d t o the

i n t e r v e n e r f o r o r a l argument.12

13. For example, i n the case o f G l o b a l i v e Wireless M an a g e m e n t Corp. v . Public

Mobile / n c . , 1 3 r e l i e d u p o n by CIPPIC i n t h i s motion, the Court l i m i t e d the proposed

i n t e r v e n e r ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n t o o n l y c e r t a i n i s s u e s , a nd l i m i t e d i t s memorandum o 1 2 p a g e s

i n l e n g t h a nd o r a l submissions o no m o r e than 20 inutes.

~ 0 1998, S.O.R./98-106."anada ( D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n &Research) . A i r Canada (1988), [1989]2 .C. 8 8 (Fed. C.A.) t

para 14.

1 2 G l o b a l i v e W i r e l e s s Man agemen t Corp. v . P u b l i c M o b i l e I n c . , 2011 FCA 119, CIPPIC Motion Record,

Ta b 6.

1 3 I b i d .

3~



E

14. The N a t i o n a l Post submits t h a t the scope o f the i n t e r v e n t i o n proposed by CIPPIC

i s o v e r l y broad. f leave t o i n t e r v e n e i s g r a n t e d t o CIPPIC, h i s Honourable Court ought o

p l a c e a p p r o p r i a t e terms on t h a t i n t e r v e n t i o n , a s u r t h e r discussed below.

CIPPIC Seeks to Raise a New ssue

15. An i n t e r v e n e r may n o t widen o r a dd t o the i s s u e s t o be determined i n a

p r o c e e d i n g . ' 4

16. CIPPIC sets out the i s s u e s t seeks o address i n the Appeals a t paragraph 4 f i t s

N o t i c e o f M o t i o n . 1 5 At paragraph 4 ( b ) , CIPPIC ha s proposed t h a t , i f granted l e a v e , t be

p e r m i t t e d t o address " t h e scope o f c o p y r i g h t l i a b i l i t y t h a t a n i n t e r m e d i a r y ca n i n c u r f o r

work posted t o i t s s i t e by a t h i r d p a r t y . "

17. This i s s u e was ot consid ered by Mr. J u s t i c e Rennie n the proceeding below, a nd

d i d not form p a r t o f the Judgment. This i s s u e w a s n o t r a i s e d by the N a t i o n a l Post i n the

N o t i c e o f Appeal, a nd was ot addr essed by a ny o f the p a r t i e s i n the m e m o r a n d a o f l aw

f i l e d i n the Appeals. t i s f u r t h e r u n c l e a r t h e e x t e n t t o which the e v i d e n t i a r y r e c o r d i n t h i s

proceeding i s s u f f i c i e n t t o opine n a ny w a y on t h i s i s s u e .

18. CIPPIC should n o t b e p e r m i t t e d t o r a i s e t h i s n ew i s s u e . I f g r a n t e d i n t e r v e n e r

s t a t u s , CIPPIC's p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be l i m i t e d t o addressing issues r a i s e d i n the

Appeals by the p a r t i e s .

' a C a n a d a M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) v . C o r b i e r e (1996), 1 9 9 N.R. 1 (Fed. C . A . ) .

1 5 CIPPIC M o t i o n Record, Ta b 1 , p . 3 .

3~



0

Limits on Other Issues Raised by CIPPIC

19. I f leave t o i n t e r v e n e i s g r a n t e d , CIPPIC's i n t e r v e n t i o n ought t o be l i m i t e d t o

addressing the issuestproposes t o address n paragraphs ( a ) , c ) , ( d ) ,(e) an d

f l o f i t s

N o t i c e o f M o t i o n , 1 6 w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e m o d i f i c a t i o n s as s e t out below.

20. With r e s p e c t t o the proposed i s s u e i n paragraph 4 ( d ) , f o r g r e a t e r c e r t a i n t y , the

N a t i o n a l Post submits t h a t CIPPIC ought t o be l i m i t e d t o addressing "what c o n s t i t u t e s

` s u b s t a n t i a l ' r e p r o d u c t i o n as s t a t e d in s u b s e c t i o n 3(1) o f the Copyright A c t ."~' t i s

" s u b s t a n t i a l " r e p r o d u c t i o n as d e f i n e d i n s u b s e c t i o n 3(1) h a t i s a t i s s u e i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g .

21. F u r t h e r , the N a t i o n a l Post b j e c t s t o CIPPIC's use o f the word "minor" n paragraph

4 ( f l , where CIPPIC proposes t h a t i t address whether "minor e x c e r p t i n g " should be

considered f a i r d e a l i n g . The q u e s t i o n o f whether t h e e x c e r p t i n g o f the Kay W ork by the

Respondents i s "minor" o r not is the v e r y i s s u e t h a t t h i s Court is t o determine i n appeal

A-3 9 4- 1 2 . An y order g r a n t i n g CIPPIC leave t o i n t e r v e n e an d d e f i n i n g the issues t h a t

CIPPIC may address ought t o p r e s e n t those i s s u e s n e u t r a l l y . A c c o r d i n g l y , the word

"minor" should be removed from CIPPIC's i s t o f proposed i s s u e s .

Limits on Written an d Oral A r g u m e n t

22. The r o l e o f an i n t e r v e n e r i s n e c e s s a r i l y more l i m i t e d than the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f a

respondent who enjoys l l r i g h t s o f a p a r t y . ' $ A c c o r d i n g l y , i n o r d e r t o ensure an e f f i c i e n t

~ 6 CIPPIC Motion Record, Tab 1 , p . 3 .

"The n d e r l i n e d p o r t i o n r e p r e s e n t s proposed a d d i t i o n a l wording t o a m e n d t h e i s s u e set out n CIPPIC's

N o t i c e o f M o t i o n .

'$Sandy P o n d A l l i a n c e t o P r o t e c t Canadian Waters I n c . v . Canada ( A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ) , 2011 FC 1 58 a t

p a r s . 41 , e v ' d i n p a r t 2011 FCA 29.



7

r e s o l u t i o n of the hearing a n d respect the r i g h t s of the p a r t i e s , l i m i t a t i o n s should be put o n

the l e n g t h a n d d u r a t i o n o f CIPPIC's w r i t t e n a n d o r a l submissions.

23. TheN a t i o n a l Po s t p r o p o s e s t h a t ,

i fleave t o i n t e r v e n e

i sgranted,

CIPPIC's

p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be l i m i t e d t o f i l i n g a memorandum o f f a c t a n d la w n ot t o ex c eed

twen ty (20) p a g e s i n l e n g t h a n d i t s o r a l submissions sh ould not e x c e e d t h i r t y (30)

minutes.

24. The N a t i o n a l Po s t n ot e s t h a t i t a n d the R e s p o n d e n t s w e r e l i m i t e d t o s u b m i t t i n g

memoranda f a c t a n d law of not m o r e than 30 a g e s , a n d t h a t Mr. Warman was i m i t e d

t o a memorandum f not m o r e than 15 pages.19

25. To the extent t h a t CIPPIC i s granted leave t o i n t e r v e n e a n d p e r m i t t e d t o f i l e a

memorandum f a c t a n d law, the N a t i o n a l Post requests the r i g h t t o d e l i v e r a responding

memorandum, ot t o e x c e e d 20 a g e s .

O t h e r Terms

26. An n t e r v e n e r ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a proceeding m u s t not merely be a r e i t e r a t i o n of the

p o s i t i o n ta ken by a p a r t y , bu t r a t h e r m u s t p r o v i d e a d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e . 2 0 Accordingly,

CIPPIC should n ot d u p l i c a t e the submissions o f the o t h e r p a r t i e s .

27. S i m i l a r l y , a n i n t e r v e n e r m u s t take the r e c o r d a s s h e i n d s , 2 1 a n d CIPPIC o u g h t not

be p e r m i t t e d t o i n t r o d u c e a n y n e w evidence.

190rder o f P e l l e t i e r J . A . , dated De c e m be r 18, 2012, R u s s e l l A f f i d a v i t , E x h i b i t "C" , Res p o nding Motion

Record, Ta b 2 ( C ) .

2 0 Ferro equ u s Railway Co . v . C . N . R . , 2003 FCA 08 t p a r s . 13.

3



: ~

Conclusion

28. These terms p e r m i t CIPPIC t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g and address t h e

issues theyseek l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e t o a d d r e s s . However, p l a c i n g terms on

CIPPIC's

i n t e r v e n t i o n s t r i k e s an a p p r o p r i a t e balance o f f a i r n e s s t o t h e p a r t i e s , drawing a c l e a r

d i s t i n c t i o n between CIPPIC as an i n t e r v e n e r and t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e Appeals.

PART V -ORDERSOUGHT

29. I f CIPPIC i s g r a n t e d l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e Appeals, t h e N a t i o n a l Post

r e s p e c t f u l l y r e q u e s t s t h a t t h i s Honourable Court g r a n t l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e on t h e f o l l o w i n g

c o n d i t i o n s :

(a) CIPPIC s h a l l b e p e r m i t t e d t o address o n l y t h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

( i ) The a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e s t a t u t o r y l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d s e t out n s u b s e c t i o n

41(1) f t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t , R.S.C. 1985, . C- 4 2 , t o works p u b l i s h e d

on t h e I n t e r n e t ;

( i i ) The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f d i s t i n c t i v e" , as s t a t e d i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f "work"

i n s e c t i o n 2 f t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t ;

( i i i ) What c o n s t i t u t e s " s u b s t a n t i a l " r e p r o d u c t i o n as s t a t e d i n s u b s e c t i o n

3(1) f t h e C o p y r i g h t A c t ;

Z ' Edmonton Friends of t h e N o r t h Environmental S o c i e t y v . Canada (Min. of Western Economic

D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n ) , [1991] F.C. 4 1 6 C.A.) t p a r s . 9 .

y



0

( i v ) The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t a t u t o r y c o n d i t i o n s precedent t o the f a i r

d e a l i n g e x c e p t i o n s , as l i s t e d i n s e c t i o n 29 and s e c t i o n s 2 9 . 1 and

29.2 f the Copyright c t ; and

(v) The circumstances i n which an excerpt f o r the purpose o f ne ws

r e p o r t i n g o r c r i t i c i s m should be considered f a i r " d e a l i n g ;

(b) CIPPIC s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d t o f i l e a m e m o r a n d u m o f f a c t and law, n o t t o

exceed 20 ages, hich s h a l l be served and i l e d w i t h i n 30 ay s f the date

o f an y Order g r a n t i n g leave t o i n t e r v e n e . The N a t i o n a l Post s h a l l be

p e r m i t t e d t o f i l e a responding m e m o r a n d u m f f a c t and law n o t t o exceed 20

pages, i t h i n 30 days f the e r v i c e o f CIPPIC's m e m o r a n d u m . There h a l l

be n o e p l y ;

(c) CIPPIC s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d t o address the Court a t the h e a r i n g o f the

Appeals, u t i t s o r a l submissions h a l l n o t exceed 30 i n u t e s ;

( d) CIPPIC h a l l not u p l i c a t e the submissions f the o t h e r p a r t i e s ;

(e) CIPPIC s h a l l be b ou nd by the r e c o r d an d may n o t i n t r o d u c e an y n ew

evidence;

( f l CIPPIC h a l l have n o i g h t t o appeal;

(g ) No costs s h a l l be awarded i n favour o f o r a g a i n s t CIPPIC n r e l a t i o n t o i t s

i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the Ap peals; and

~ i



~10

(h) CIPPIC h a l l be added t o the t y l e o f cause n the Appeals as an i n t e r v e n e r .

ALLOFWHICH S RESPECTFULLYSUBMITTED h i s 1 3 t " day o f May, 2013.

CASSELSBROC~yBLACKWELL LLP

2100 c o t i a Plaz~~40 ing S t r e e t West

Toronto,ON M5H3C2


T e l : 416.869.5403

Fax: 416.644.9326

cc h s i c [email protected]


T e l : 416.860.2988

Fax: 647.259.7993

[email protected]


N a t i o n a l Post C o m p an y



PART V LIST OF AUTHORITIES

1 . Copyright Act . S . C . , 1985, . C-4 2

2. Federal Court Rules, 1998, S.O. . / 9 8-106, R. 1 0 9

3 . Warman t l . v . F o u r n i e r , 2 0 1 3 FC 0 3

4. C an ada D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n &Research) . A i r Canada 1988), 1989]2 .C. 8 8

( Fed. C.A.)

5. C an ada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northe rn A f f a i r s ) v . C o r b i e r e (1996), 1 9 9 N.R. 1 (Fed.

C.A.)

6. Ferroequus Railway C o. v . C . N . R . , 2 0 0 3 FCA 0 8

7. Edmonton Friends of h e North Environmental Sociefy v . C ana d a (Min. of Western

Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n ) ,[1991] F.C. 4 1 6 C.A.)

8. Sandy Pond l l i a n c e t o P r o t e c t Canadian Waters n c . v . C ana d a Attorney G e n e r a l ) ,

2 011 FC 58





F e d e r a l Court

Ottawa, Ontario, June 21,2012

PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. u s t i c e Rennie

BETWEEN:

RICHARDWARMAN n dNATIONAL POSTCOMPANY

an d

MARK OURNIER n d

CONSTANCE FOURNIER

C o u r e d e r a l e

Date:0120621

Docket: T-784-ll

C i t a t i o n : 2012FC 03

REASONSFORJUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT

A p p l i c a n t s

Respondents

[ 1] The a p p l i c a n t a l l e g e s i n f r i n g e m e n t by h e r e s p o n d e n t s of is c o p y r i g h t i n t h r e e works, nd

seeks e v e r a l r e m e d i e s i n r e s p e c t o f t h a t a l l e g e d i n f r i n g e m e n t . Forthe r e a s o n s t h a t f o l l o w t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n i s d i s m i s s e d i n r e s p e c t o f a l l t h r e e works.

Facts

[2] T h i s a p p l i c a t i o n r e l a t e s t o t h e a l l e g e d i n f r i n g e m e n t ofRichard Warman's ( a p p l i c a n t ' s )

c o p y r i g h t i n t h r e e works. The i r s t i s a speech a u t h o r e d by t h e a p p l i c a n t , t i t l e d , "Ma~mum



Page:2

D i s r u p t i o n : S t o p p i n g Neo- N a z i s By Almost) A ny Means Necessity" Warman Work). The

a p p l i c a n t a u t h o r e d t h e Warman Work n J u l y 2005, nd r e g i s t e r e d h i s c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Warman

Work o n Feb ruary 18, 2011.

[3] The second work s an a r t i c l e a u t h o r e d b y J o n a t h a n Kay h i l e he wa s employed b y h e

N a t i o n a l Post Comp any ( N P ) , i t l e d " J o n a t h a n Kay n R i c h a r d Warman and Canada's Phony-

Racism I n d u s t r y " (Kay Work). The a p p l i c a n t o b t a i n e d an e x c l u s i v e l i c e n s e t o t h e c o p y r i g h t i n t h e

Kay Work h r o u g h an agreement w i t h NP n J a n u a r y 13, 010. The a p p l i c a n t r e g i s t e r e d h i s

c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Kay Work on March 10, 2011.

[4] The t h i r d work s a photogaph o f t h e a p p l i c a n t and a n o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l , t a k e n b y M. a r r e r a

( B a r r e r a Work). The a p p l i c a n t o b t a i n e d t h e c o p y r i g h t i n t h e B a r r e r a Work y a s s i g n m e n t on

August 11, 010, nd r e g i s t e r e d h i s c o p y r i g h t on February 18, 011.

[5] The r e s p o n d e n t s , Mark and Constance F o u r n i e r , o p e r a t e t h e w e b s i t e

www.freedominion.com (Free Dominion). They d e s c r i b e Free Dominion a s an o n l i n e p o l R i c a l

news d i s c u s s i o n forum which i s a c c e s s i b l e t o any m e m b e r o f h e p u b l i c and which i s u s e d f o r

d i s c u s s i n g p o l i t i c a l i s s u e s from a c o n s e r v a t i v e v i e w p o i n t .

[6] The a p p l i c a n t s t a t e s t h a t he i r s t d i s c o v e r e d t h a t t h e Warnlan Work ha d been r e p r o d u c e d o n

Free Dominion i n September 2007. The r e s p o n d e n t s acknowledge t h a t a c o py o f t h e Warman

Work wa s uploaded o n t o t h e Free Dominion s e r v e r a t t h a t t i m e . They s t a t e t h a t i t wa s a s c a n n e d

copy o f n e ~ i b i t i n a Canadian H u m a n R i g h t s T r i b u n a l c a s e . The a p p l i c a n t s e n t an e m a i l t o t h e

~



Page:3

r e s p o n d e n t s t h r o u g h a h i r d p a r t y on October7,2007, demanding t h a t t h e War man Work be

removed from t h e w e b s i t e .

[7] The a p p l i c a n t s t a t e s t h a t he d i s c o v e r e d i n A p r i l 2010 h a t t h e Kay Work ha d been

reproduced on Free Dominion. The r e s p o n d e n t s s t a t e t h a t t h e Kay Work wa s p o s t e d i n a d i s c u s s i o n

t h r e a d on Free Dominion on J a n u a r y 10,2008 a l t h o u g h t h e d a t e of h e p o s t n t h e r e c o r d appears a s

Februa ry 18, 008). The a p p l i c a n t d e m an d e d t h a t t h e Kay Work betaken down on A p r i l 16 , 2010,

a t which t i t h e t h e r e s p o n d e n t s removed t h e Kay Work, u t p o s t e d e x c e r p t s of h e Kay ork n i t s

p l a c e .

[8] The a p p l i c a n t s t a t e s t h a t he d i s c o v e r e d t h a t t h e B a r r e r a Work ad been reproduced on Free

Dominion i n August 2010, nd t h a t t h e W a r m a n Work l s o c o n t i n u e d t o be reproduced a t t h a t t i m e .

The r e s p o n d e n t s s t a t e t h a t t h e B a r r e r a Work was n e v e r u p l o a d e d o n t o t h e s e r v e r f o r Free Dominion;

r a t h e r , a m e m b e r p o s t e d an n l i n e l i n k t o t h e B a r r e r a Work s t appeared on h e a p p l i c a n t s p e r s o n a l

w e b s i t e on May 7, 010. The r e s p o n d e n t s s t a t e t h a t t h e B a r r e r a Work a s no l o n g e r d i s p l a y e d on

t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s w e b s i t e and t h e r e f o r e t h e i n l i n e l i n k no l o n g e r worked, s ofJune 7,201 1 .

Relevant e g i s l a t i o n

[9] S e c t i o n 27 f h e Copyright Act(RSC, 985,cC-42) Copyright Act) e f i n e s i n f r i n g e m e n t

of o p y r i g h t :

I n f r i n g e m e n t g e n e r a l l y

27. 1) t i s an i n f r i n g e m e n t of

c o p y r i g h t f o r any p e r s o n t o do, i t h o u t

t h e c o n s e n t of h e owner of h e

c o p y r i g h t , a n y t h i n g t h a t by h i s Act

R e g l e g e n e r a l e

27. 1) o n s t i t u e u n e v i o l a t i o n du d r o i t

d ' a u t e u r 1 ' a c c o m p l i s s e m e n t , s a n s l e

consentement d u i t u l a i r e de ce d r o i t ,

d ' u n a c t e q u ' e n v e ~ • t u de a p i - e s e n t e l o i

y



o n l y t h e owner of h e c o p y r i g h t h a s t h e s e u l ce i t u l a i r e a a f a c u h e

r i g h t t o do. d ' a c c o m p l i r .

[10] S e c t i o n3

f h e Copyright Ac t e t s o u t t h e r i g h t s i n c l u d e d i n a o p y r i g h t i n a work:

C o p y r i g h t i n works

3. 1) or h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s A c t ,

" c o p y r i g h t" , i n r e l a t i o n t o a work,

means t h e s o l e r i g h t t o produce or

r e p r o d u c e t h e work or any s u b s t a n t i a l

p a r t t h e r e o f n any m a t e r i a l form

w h a t e v e r , t o p e r f o r m t h e work or any

s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t t h e r e o f n p u b l i c o r , f

t h e work s u n p u b l i s h e d , t o p u b l i s h t h e

work or any s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t t h e r e o f ,

and i n c l u d e s t h e s o l e r i g h t

(a ) o p r o d u c e , r e p r o d u c e , e r f o r m or

p u b l i s h any r a n s l a t i o n of h e work,

(b) n t h e c a s e of r a m a t i c work, o

c o n v e r t i t i n t o a o v e l or t h e r n o n -

d r a m a t i c work,

(c ) n t h e c a s e of o v e l or t h e r non-

d r a m a t i c work, or of n r t i s t i c work,

t o c o n v e r t i t i n t o a r a m a t i c work, by

wa y of e r f o r m a n c e i n p u b l i c or

o t h e r w i s e ,

(d) n t h e c a s e of i t e r a r y , d r a m a t i c or

m u s i c a l work, o m ake any sound

r e c o r d i n g , cinematogaph f i l m o r o t h e r

c o n t r i v a n c e by means of h i c h t h e

work m a y be m e c h a n i c a l l y r e p r o d u c e d

or e r f o r m e d ,

(e ) n t h e c a s e of ny i t e r a r y , d r a m a t i c ,m u s i c a l or r t i s t i c work, o r e p r o d u c e ,

a d a p t and p u b l i c l y p r e s e n t t h e work a s

a i n e m a t o g a p h i c work,

( f l i n t h e c a s e of ny i t e r a r y , d r a m a t i c ,

m u s i c a l or r t i s t i c work, o

D r o i t d ' a u t e u r s u r 1 ' o e u v r e

3. 1) e d r o i t d ' a u t e u r s u r 1 ' o e u v r e

comporte e d r o i t e x c l u s i f de r o d u i r e

ou e p r o d u i r e l a t o t a l i t e ou u n e p a r t i e

i m p o r t a n t e de ' o e u v r e , sous une forme

m a t e r i e l l e q u e l c o n q u e , d ' e n e x e c u t e r

ou ' e n r e p r e s e n t e r l a t o t a l i t e ou u n e

p a r t i e i m p o r t a n t e en p u b l i c e t , s i

1 ' o e u v r e nest pas u b l i e e , d ' e n p u b l i e r

l a t o t a l i t e ou une p a r t i e i m p o r t a n t e ; ce

d r o i t comporte, en o u t r e , e d r o i t

e x c l u s i f

a) e r o d u i r e , r e p r o d u i r e , r e p r e s e n t e r

ou u b l i e r u n e t r a d u c t i o n de ' o e u v r e ;

b) ' i l s ' a g i t d u n e o e u v r e d r a m a t i q u e ,

de a t r a n s f o r m e r en u n roman ou en

u n e a u t r e o e u v r e non d r a m a t i q u e ;

c) ' i l s ' a g i t d ' u n roman ou ' u n e a u t r e

o e u v r e non d r a m a t i q u e , ou ' u n e

o e u v r e a r t i s t i q u e , de r a n s f o r m e r c e t t e

o e u v r e en u n e o e u v r e d r a m a t i q u e , p a r

v o i e de e p r e s e n t a t i o n p u b l i q u e ou

a u t r e m e n t ;

d ) ' i l s ' a g i t d u n e o e u v r e l i t t e r a i r e ,

d r a m a t i q u e ou u s i c a l e , d ' e n f a i r e u n

e n r e g i s t r e m e n t s o n o r e , f i l m

cinematogaphique ou u t r e s u p p o r t , a

1 ' a i d e d e s q u e l s 1 ' o e u v r e p e u t e t r e

r e p r o d u i t e , r e p r e s e n t e e ou x e c u t e emecaniquement;

e) ' i l s ' a g i t d u n e o e u v r e l i t t e r a i r e ,

d r a m a t i q u e , m u s i c a l e ou r t i s t i q u e , de

r e p r o d u i r e , d ' a d a p t e r e t de r e s e n t e r

p u b l i q u e m e n t 1 ' o e u v r e en a n t

Page:4



communicate t h e work o t h e p u b l i c by

t e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n ,

(g) o p r e s e n t a t a p u b l i c e ~ i b i t i o n , f o r

a p u r p o s e o t h e r t h a ns a l e

ori r e , an

a r t i s t i c work c r e a t e d a f t e r J u n e 7, 1988,

o t h e r t h a n a map, h a r t or l a n ,

(h) n t h e c a s e of computer progam

t h a t ca n be r e p r o d u c e d i n t h e o r d i n a r y

c o u r s e of t s u s e , o t h e r t h a n by a

r e p r o d u c t i o n d u r i n g i t s e x e c u t i o n i n

c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a a c h i n e , d e v i c e or

c o m p u t e r , t o r e n t o u t t h e computer

progam, and

( i ) n t h e c a s e of m u s i c a l work, o r e n t

o u t a ound r e c o r d i n g i n w h i c h t h e

work s embodied,

an d t o a u t h o r i z e any s u c h a c t s .

A ~ i a l y s i s

wllY3ltQlt WOl'~C

q u ' o e u v r e c i n e m a t o g r a p h i q u e ;

f l d e communiquer au p u b l i c , p a r

t e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n , un e o e u v r e

l i t t e r a i r e , d r a m a t i q u e , m u s i c a l e ou

a r t i s t i q u e ;

g) e r e s e n t e r au p u b l i c t o r s d une

e x p o s i t i o n , a des i n s a u t r e s que l a

v e n t e ou a l o c a t i o n , une o e u v r e

a r t i s t i q u e—u t r e qu'une c a r t e

geogaphique ou a r i n e , un p l a n ou un

g r a p h i q u e—r e e e a p r e s e 7 u i n

1988;

h) e o u e r un progamme d ' o r d i n a t e u r

q u i p e u t e t r e r e p r o d u i t dans e c a d r e

normal d e son t i l i s a t i o n , sauf a

r e p r o d u c t i o n e f f e c t u e e pendant son

e x e c u t i o n avec un o r d i n a t e u r ou u t r e

machine ou p p a r e i l ;

s ' i l s ' a g i t d u n e o e u v r e m u s i c a l e ,

d ' e n l o u e r t o u t e n r e g i s t r e m e n t s o n o r e .

Est i n c l u s dans l a p r e s e n t e d e f i n i t i o n l e

d r o i t e x c l u s i f d ' a u t o r i s e r ce s a c t e s .

Page:5

[11] The r e s p o n d e n t s d o n o t d i s p u t e t h a t c o p y r i g h t s u b s i s t s i n t h e Warman Work, r h a t t h e

a p p l i c a n t i s t h e owner of h e c o p y r i g h t as h e a u t h o r . I am a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e s e e l e m e n t s of

e s t a b l i s h i n g i n f r i n g e m e n t a r e met.

[12] I f i n d t h a t , w h i l e t h e a p p l i c a n t ha s e s t a b l i s h e d primafacie n f r i n g e m e n t o f h i s c o p y r i g h t i n

t h e Warman Work, e s p r e c l u d e d from o b t a i n i n g any remedy f o r t h e i n f r i n g e m e n t p u r s u a n t t o

s e c t i o n 41(1) f h e Copyright ct .

0

0



Pabe:6

[13] The a p p l i c a n t h a s e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s a u t h o r i z e d t h e communication o f h e

Warma n Work b y t e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n , b y u p l o a d i n g a c opy o ft

o n t ot h e i r s e r v e r . The Canada

C o p y r i g h t Board h e l d i n Public Performance o f usical Works R e ) , 1999]CBDNo , t p 19,

t h a t a p e r s o n a u t h o r i z e s communication o f work by e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n when t h a t p e r s o n makes

t h e work a v a i l a b l e t o t h e p u b l i c o n a s e r v e r . The r e s p o n d e n t s do n o t deny d o i n g t h i s and t h e r e f o r e I

f i n d t h a t primafacie i n f r i n g e m e n t h a s been e s t a b l i s h e d .

[14] The r e s p o n d e n t s advance s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e d e f e n c e s f o r t h i s i n f r i n g e m e n t b u t t h e y need n o t

b e c o n s i d e r e d because t h e a p p l i c a n t i s n o t e n t i t l e d t o a remedy i n r e s p e c t o f h i s i n f i - i n g e m e n t ,

p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 41(1) f h e Copyright Act, which s t a t e s :

L i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d f o r c i v i l r e m e d i e s

41. 1) u b j e c t t o s u b s e c t i o n ( 2 ) , a

c o u r t m a y n o t award a remedy i n

r e l a t i o n t o an i n f r i n g e m e n t u n l e s s

(a) n t h e case where t h e p l a i n t i f f knew,

or c o u l d r e a s o n a b l y have b e e n

e x p e c t e d t o know, o f h e i n f r i n g e m e n t

a t t h e t i m e i t o c c u r r e d , t h e p r o c e e d i n g s

f o r i n f r i n g e m e n t a r e c o m m e n c e d

w i t h i n t h r e e y e a r s a f t e r t h e

i n f r i n g e m e n t o c c u r r e d ;

(b ) n t h e case where t h e p l a i n t i f f d i d

n o t know, and c o u l d n o t r e a s o n a b l y

have b e e n expected t o know, f t h e

i n f r i n g e m e n t a t t h e t i m e i t o c c u r r e d , t h e

p r o c e e d i n g s f o r i n f r i n g e m e n t a r e

c o m m e n c e d w i t h i n t h r e e y e a r s a$er t h e

t i m e when t h e p l a i n t i f f f i r s t knew, or

c o u l d r e a s o n a b l y have been e x p e c t e d

t o know, f h e i n f r i n g e m e n t .

P r e s c r i p t i o n

41. 1) o us e s e r v e du paragaphe

( 2 ) , e t r i b u n a l s a i s i d ' u n r e c o u r s en

v i o l a t i o n ne p e a t a c c o r d e r de

r e p a r a t i o n s que si

a) e demandeur engage de s

p r o c e d u r e s dans l e s t r o i s ans q u i

s u i v e n t l e m o m e n t o u a v i o l a t i o n a

e u i e u , s ' i l a v a i l c o n n a i s s a n c e de a

v i o l a t i o n au m o m e n t o u l l e a e u i e u

o u ' i l e s t r a i s o n n a b l e de s ' a t t e n d r e a

ce q u ' i l e n r t e u c o n n a i s s a n c e a c e

m o m e n t ;

b ) e demandeur engage de s r o c e d u r e sdans l e s t r o i s ans q u i s u i v e n t l e m o m e n t

o u t a r i s c o n n a i s s a n c e de a v i o l a t i o n

o u e m o m e n t o u t e s t r a i s o n r s a b l e de

s ' a t t e n d r e a ce q u ' i l e n a r t p r i s

c o n n a i s s a n c e , s ' i l n ' e n a v a i l pa s

c o n n a i s s a n c e au m o m e n t o u l l e a eu



S

Page:7

l i e u ou ' i l nest p a s r a i s o n n a b l e de

s ' a t t e n d r e a ce u ' i l e n a i t e u

c o n n a i s s a n c e a ce moment.

[15] The a p p l i c a n t h a s acknowledged t h a t he k n e w a b o u t t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s i n f i - i n g e m e n t o f t h e

Warm a n Work i n c e September 2007. T h u s , he d i d n o t b r i n g t h i s p r o c e e d i n g w i t h i n t h e l i m i t a t i o n

p e r i o d p r e s c r i b e d b y e c t i o n 41(1) f t h e Copyright Ac t a nd h e r e f o r e he s t i m e - b a r r e d from r a i s i n g

c o p y r i g h t i n f r i n g e m e n t i n r e s p e c t of h a t work: h i l i p Morris ProductsS A v Malboro C a n a d a td,

2010FC 099 t p a r a 353.

[16] The a p p l i c a n t advanced t wo a r g u m e n t s on h i s i s s u e : f i r s t , h e a l l e g e d i n h i s a f f i d a v i t t h a t h e

l e a r n e d of a n e w , s u b s e q u e n t i n f r i n g e m e n t i n 2010, nd t h e r e f o r e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f a l l s w i t h i n t h e

l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d i n r e s p e c t of h a t i n f r i n g e m e n t .

[17] T h i s a l l e g a t i o n i s n o t s u b s t a n t i a t e d b y h e e v i d e n c e . The a p p l i c a n t i n c l u d e d a URL n h i s

a f f i d a v i t t h a t s u p p o s e d l y l e d t o a second u p l o a d e d copy of h e Warman Work u t , a s h e

r e s p o n d e n t s n o t e , t h a t URL a s n o t f u n c t i o n a l . The a p p l i c a n t d i d n o t , f o r e x a m p l e , p r o v i d e a

p r i n t o u t of h e Warman Work w i t h t h a t URL i s t e d a t h e bottom w h i c h would h a v e b een e v i d e n c e

t h a t t h e r e w a s a n a d d i t i o n a l u p l o a d e d copy of h e Warm a n Work. T h u s , t h e o n l y i n f r i n g e m e n t of

t h e Warm a n Work e s t a b l i s h e d b y h e e v i d e n c e f a l l s o u t s i d e t h e l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d .

[18] Second, h e a p p l i c a n t a r g u e s t h a t , f o l l o w i n g t h e C o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n i n M i l l i k e n & o.

I n t e r f a c e Flooring Systems C a n a d a ) n c . (1996), 123 FTR 69, 5 CPR 3d) 81, h e l i m i t a t i o n

p e r i o d i n s e c t i o n 41(1) f t h e CopyrightAct does o t a p p l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o i n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f . I n t h a t



S

Pabe: 8

d e c i s i o n , J u s t i c e Tremblay-Lamer f o u n d t h a t s e c t i o n 41(1)wa s n a p p l i c a b l e t o a n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r an

i n j u n c t i o n , because o f t h e e q u i t a b l e n a t u r e of h a t r e l i e f .

[19] The o n l y c a s e s c i t e d i n t h a t d e c i s i o n d a t e b a c k o t h e 1920s. I would n o t e t h a t r e c e n t c a s e s

of h i s Court and o t h e r c o u r t s , i n c l u d i n g . t h o s e i n which a n i n j u n c t i o n wa s o u g h t , have a p p l i e d t h e

l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d and d e n i e d any remedy. No x c e p t i o n w as m a d e f o r i n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f : Drolet v

S t i f t u n g G r a l s b o t s c h a f t , 2 0 0 9FC 7; mith v Ha yd e n, 0 10ONCA 71. I t i s u n c l e a r whether t h e

p a r t i e s i n t h o s e c a s e s a r g u e d t h a t i n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f wa s a v a i l a b l e o u t s i d e t h e l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d .

[20] In my i e w , even i f s e c t i o n 41(1) oe s o t p r e c l u d e t h e g a n t i n g of n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f , i t a t t h e

very l e a s t i n f o r m s t h e e x e r c i s e of h e C o u r t ' s d i s c r e t i o n t o gant a n n j u n c t i o n f o r c o p y r i g h t

i n f r i n g e m e n t . I t would b e o n t r a r y t o P a r l i a m e n t ' s i n t e n t t o f i n d t h a t a n i n j u n c t i o n i s p r e s u m p t i v e l y

a v a i l a b l e f o r a n i n f i - i n g e m e n t i f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n i s b r o u g h t o u t s i d e t h e l i m i t a t i o n p e r i o d . I t i s more

c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e Copyright Ac t o r t h e Court o l i m i t t h e e x e r c i s e of t s d i s c r e t i o n t o gant an

i n j u n c t i o n t o c i r c u m s t a n c e s where t w i l l have some p r a c t i c a l e f fe c t and t h e b a l a n c e of o n v e n i e n c e

s t r o n g l y f a v o u r s g r a n t i n g t h e i n j u n c t i o n . The Supreme Court of anada(SCC) o n f i r m e d i n CCH

C a n a d i a n t d . v Law o c i e t y of Uppe r C a n a d a, 0 0 4 SCC 3, t p a r a 85, h a t an i n j u n c t i o n i s an

e q u i t a b l e r e m e d y and t h u s w i t h i n t h e C o u r t ' s d i s c r e t i o n .

[21] I n t h i s c a s e , h e a p p l i c a n t h a s n o t shown t h a t an i n j u n c t i o n i s n e c e s s a r y t o p r e v e n t f u r t h e r

i n f r i n g e m e n t ; r a t h e r , t h e e v i d e n c e i s t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s have removed t h e Wa r m a n Work from

t h e i r s e r v e r and t h e p h y s i c a l c o p i e s t h e y r e t a i n a r e f o r t h e purposes of e f e n d i n g t h e d e f a m a t i o n



s

Page:9

a c t i o n b r o u g h t a g a i n s t them by h e a p p l i c a n t . T h u s , I d e c l i n e t o e x e r c i s e my i s c r e t i o n t o g r a n t an

i n j u n c t i o n i n r e s p e c t of h e W ar m a n Work a n d t h i s a s p e c t of h e a p p l i c a t i o n i s d i s m i s s e d .

Ka y Work

[22] The a p p l i c a n t o b t a i n e d a n e x c l u s i v e l i c e n s e t o t h e c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Ka y Work on J a n u a r y 1 3 ,

2010, nd t h e r e f o r e i s a b l e t o sue a h i r d p a r t y f o r i n f r i n g e m e n t : Euro Excellence Inc v Kraft

C a n a d a n c , 2007SCC 7, t pars 31. O n c e a g a i n , t h e r e s p o n d e n t does o t d i s p u t e t h a t c o p y r i g h t0

s u b s i s t s i n t h e Kay Work or h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t i s e n t i t l e d t o b r i n g a n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r i n f r i n g e m e n t .

Th e r e s p o n d e n t s a r g u e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n i s a l s o t i m e - b a r r e d i n r e s p e c t o f t h e Kay Work; however, h e

a p p l i c a n t d i d n o t o b t a i n l i c e n s e t o t h e c o p y r i g h t u n t i l 2010, nd t h e r e f o r e c o u l d n o t have become

aware of n f r i n g e m e n t of i s c o p y r i g h t u n t i l t h a t t i m e .

No eproduction ofa SubstantialPart

[23] The a p p l i c a n t s u b m i t s t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s i n f r i n g e d h i s c o p y r i g h t i n t h e Kay Work by

r e p r o d u c i n g e x c e r p t s from i t . He r g u e s t h a t t h e reproduced e x c e r p t s c o n s t i t u t e a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t of

t h e Kay Work, o n t r a r y t o s e c t i o n s 3 nd 27 f h e Copyright Act. Whether a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t of

work h a s been reproduced s a u e s t i o n of a c t a nd i n v o l v e s a q u a l i t a t i v e r a t h e r t h a n q u a n t i t a t i v e

a n a l y s i s . The r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s t o be c o n s i d e r e d i n c l u d e :

a . t h e q u a l i t y a nd q u a n t i t y of h e m a t e r i a l t a k e n ;

b. t h e e ~ c t e n t t o which t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s u s e a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t s t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s a c t i v i t i e s

and d i m i n i s h e s t h e v a l u e o f t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s c o p y r i g h t ;

c . whether t h e m a t e r i a l t a k e n i s t h e proper u b j e c t- m a t t e r ofa o p y ► - i ~ l ~ t ;



Page: 10

d . w h e t h e r t h e r e s p o n d e n t i i ~ t e n t i o i ~ a l l y a p p r o p r i a t e d t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s work t o s a v e t i n e

and e f f o r t ; and

e . whether t h e m a t e r i a l t a k e n i s u s e d i n t h e same or a s i m i l a r f a s h i o n as h e a p p l i c a n t ' s :

U& a x ServicesLt d vH& lock C a n a d a nc, 1995]FCJ No 62, t P a r a 35.

[24] A p p l y i n g t h o s e f a c t o r s t o h i s c a s e , f i n d t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s d i d n o t r e p r o d u c e a

s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t of h e Kay ork, nd t h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s n o i n f r i n g e m e n t .

[25] Q u a n t i t a t i v e l y , t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s l e s s t h a n h a l f of h e work. Th e Kay o rk t s e l f

c o n s i s t s of e a d l i n e and e l e v e n paragaphs. Th e r e p r o d u c t i o n on Free Dominion i n c l u d e d t h e

h e a d l i n e , t h r e e complete p ar a g a p h s and p a r t of o u r t h . Q u a l i t a t i v e l y , t h e p o r t i o n s reproduced a r e

t h e opening "hook" o f t h e a r t i c l e , and t h e summary of h e f a c t s on which t h e a r t i c l e wa s a s e d .

Most of h e comment ary and o r i g i n a l t h o u g h t e x p r e s s e d by h e a u t h o r i s n o t r e p r o d u c e d .

[26] Most of h e o t h e r f a c t o r s a r e n o t d i r e c t l y r e l e v a n t i n th i s c a s e g i v e n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n

which t h e a p p l i c a n t o b t a i n e d t h e c o p y r i g h t : he does o t appear o "use" t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r of h e

c o p y r i g h t i n t h e s e n s e of e p r o d u c i n g or p u b l i s h i n g t h e Kay ork. I t i s a h i g h l y c r i t i c a l a r t i c l e

about h e a p p l i c a n t and t appears he s o u g h t t h e e x c l u s i v e l i c e n s e t o t h e Kay o r k n o r d e r t o

p r e v e n t i t s f u r t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n .

[27] I t does n o t appear h a t t h e e x c e r p t s ofthe Kay o r k were reproduced t o "save t i m e and

e f f o r t" . Based on t h e c o n t e x t of h e p o s t i n g , t h e r e s p o n d e n t s reproduced p o r t i o n s of h e Kay o r k

t o p r e s e r v e a r e c o r d of h e f a c t s summarized i n t h e a r t i c l e , so t h a t members of ree Domini on c o u l d

c o n t i n u e t o d i s c u s s t h o s e f a c t s on t h e f o r u m . A l s o , c o n t r a r y t o t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s a r g u m e n t , t h e

~3

0



Page: 1 1

r e p r o d u c t i o n does i n c h ~ d e a summary o r p a r a p h r a s e o f a r t o f h e work, p e c i f i c a l l y t h e s e c o n d

paragaph.

[28] T h u s , c o n s i d e r i n g t h e m a t t e r a s a w h o l e , I i n d a s a a c t t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t h a s n o t e s t a b l i s h e d

t h a t t h e excepts o f h e KayWork e p r o d u c e d by h e r e s p o n d e n t c o n s t i t u t e a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t " o f

t h e work, nd t h e r e i s t h e r e f o r e no i n f r i n g e m e n t .

FairDealingfor the Purpos es ofNews eporting

[29] I n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , even i f t h e reproduced p o r t i o n s o f h e Kay o r k amount t o a u b s t a n t i a l

p a r t , I f i n d t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ' r e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s f a i r d e a l i n g f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f e w s

r e p o r t i n g , p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 29.2 o f h e Copyright Act.

[30] The SCC's e c i s i o n m C C H s e t s u t i m p o r t a n t g u i d i n g p r i n c i p l e s i n a p p l y i n g t h e f a u -

d e a l i n g e x c e p t i o n . Th e SCC mphasized a t p a r a g r a p h 48 h a t f a i r d e a l i n g i s b e s t u n d e r s t o o d as a n

i n t e g a l p a r t o f h e c o p y r i g h t r e g i m e and as a u s e r ' s r i g h t , r a t h e r t h a n a e f e n c e . I n o r d e r t o a v a i l

t h e m s e l v e s o f h e e x c e p t i o n t h e r e s p o n d e n t s must e s t a b l i s h f i r s t , t h a t t h e d e a l i n g w a s o r on e o f t h e

purposes a r t i c u l a t e d i n s e c t i o n 29 f h e Copyright Act, nd second, h a t t h e d e a l i n g w a s a i r .

[31] Th e SCC t a t e d i n CCH, t p a r a g r a p h 51, h a t t h e f a i r d e a l i n g p u r p o s e s i n t h a t c a s e ,

r e s e a r c h ) "must be i v e n a a r g e and l i b e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n o r d e r t o e n s u r e t h a t u s e r s ' r i g h t s a r e n o t

u n d u l y c o n s t r a i n e d . " Applying t h i s l a r g e and l b e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t o n e w s r e p o r t i n g , I f i n d t h a t t h e

r e s p o n d e n t s ' d e a l i n g i n r e s p e c t o f h e Kay Work a l l s w i t h i n t h i s p u r p o s e . They p o s t e d t h e e x c e r p t s

o f h e KayWork n Free Dominion t o p r o m u l g a t e t h e f a c t s r e c o u n t e d i n t h a t a r t i c l e . Thus, t h e f i r s t



Page: 12

c r i t e r i o n f o r f a i r d e a l i n g i s m e t . The news r e p o r t i n g e x c e p t i o n a l s o r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e s o u r c e and

a u t h o r be m e n t i o n e d , which i s a l s o s a t i s f i e d i n t h i s c a s e .

[32] The SCC e t out e v e r a l f a c t o r s t h a t ma y be e l e v a n t i n d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r d e a l i n g i s f a i r

i n CCH, t paragaph 53:

(1) h e purpose o f t h e d e a l i n g ; (2) h e c h a r a c t e r o f h e d e a l i n g ; (3) h e

amount o f t h e d e a l i n g ; (4) l t e r n a t i v e s t o t h e d e a l i n g ; (5) h e n a t u r e

o f h e work; and (6) h e e f f e c t o f h e d e a l i n g o n h e work. A l t h o u g h

t h e s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w i l l n o t a l l a r i s e i n every c a s e o f a i r d e a l i n g ,

t h i s l i s t o f a c t o r s p r o v i d e s a s e f u l a n a l y t i c a l framework t o govern

d e t e r m i n a t i o n s o f a i r n e s s i n f u t u r e c a s e s .

[33] These f a c t o r s m i l R a t e i n f a v o u r o f i n d i n g o f a i r d e a l i n g i n t h i s c a s e . As i s c u s s e d above,

t h e d e a l i n g wa s o r o ne o f h e a l l o w a b l e p u r p o s e s under t h e Copyright Act. The amount o f h e

d e a l i n g wa s e r y l i m i t e d . The reproduced p o r t i o n o f h e Kay o r k o n t a i n e d m o s t l y f a c t s and d i d

n o t c o n t a i n most o f h e o r i g i n a l commentary by h e a u t h o r . The n a t u r e o f h e work f a v o u r s a

f i n d i n g o f a i r d e a l i n g . The Kay Work s n o t c u r r e n t l y p u b l i s h e d , which s u p p o r t s a i n d i n g o f a i r

d e a l i n g because one o f h e purposes o f c o p y r i g h t law i s t o promote w i d e r d i s s e m i n a t i o n o f works:

CCH, t p a r a 58. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e d e a l i n g i s n o t competing w i t h t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s u s e o f h e Kay

Work ecause he d o e s no t seek o p u b l i s h i t .

[34] Some f h e f a c t o r s weigh l e s s s t r o n g l y i n f a v o u r o f f i n d i n g o f a i r d e a l i n g : t h e r e wa s

a r g u a b l y a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e d e a l i n g , namely p r o v i d i n g a summary o f h e Kay o r k n s t e a d o f

r e p r o d u c i n g e x c e r p t s . A l s o , t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e d e a l i n g d o e s o t s t r o n g l y s u p p o r t a i n d i n g o f a i r

d e a l i n g . The e x c e r p t s a r e w i d e l y d i s t r i b u t e d o n h e I n t e r n e t a s opposed t o t h e making o f p r i v a t e

S

0



f~

Page: 13

copy. However, b a l a n c i n g a l l t h e f a c t o r s t o g e t h e r , I f i n d t h a t t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n of 1 1 e Kay Work a l l s

w i t h i n t h e f a i r d e a l i n g exception f o r t h e purposes o f ews r e p o r t i n g .

[35] T h u s , b e c a u s e t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n of h e Ka y Work i d n o t c o n s t i t u t e a u b s t a n t i a l p a r t , a n d

even i f t d i d , t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n f a l l s w i t h i n t h e scope of a i r d e a l i n g f o r t h e p u r p o s e s of ews

r e p o r t i n g , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n i n r e s p e c t ofthe KayWork s d i s m i s s e d .

B a i • r e r a Work

[36] Th e a p p l i c a t i o n i n r e s p e c t of h e B a r r e r a Work must a i l because an y communication of h e

B a r r e r a Work y e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n wa s u t h o r i z e d b y h e a p p l i c a n t . Communication of work b y

t e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i l l o n l y c o n s t i t u t e i n f r i n g e m e n t i f t was n a u t h o r i z e d . I n Public Performance,

t h e C o p y r i g h t Board h e l d a t page 19 h a t making a work a v a i l a b l e on an I n t e r n e t w e b s i t e a c c e s s i b l e

t o t h e p u b l i c c o n s t i t u t e s a u t h o r i z a t i o n of ommunication b y e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n :

" A u t h o r i z a t i o n " c o n s t i t u t e s a s e p a r a t e p r o t e c t e d u s e under t h e A c t .

To u t h o r i z e i s t o s a n c t i o n , approve or c o u n t e n a n c e . Th e person wh o

makes a u s i c a l work v a i l a b l e on an n t e r n e t- a c c e s s i b l e s i t e

a u t h o r i z e s i t s communication. Th e work s p o s t e d f o r t h e s o l e

purpose of e i n g communicated and w i t h f u l l knowledge and

i n t e n t i o n t h a t such a communication would o c c u r . Th e person wh o

makes h e work a v a i l a b l e does more t h a n m e r e l y p r o v i d e t h e means

t o communicate t h e work; he/ s h e e i t h e r c o n t r o l s or p u r p o r t s t o

c o n t r o l t h e r i g h t t o communicate i t .

[37] Th e e v i d e n c e i s c l e a r t h a t t h e B a r r e r a Work was p o s t e d on t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s p e r s o n a l w e b s i t e

and t h u s t h e communicationo f t h e B a r r e r a Work c c u r r e d b y r e a t i n g a h y p e r l i n k t o t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s

own e b s i t e . Thus, h e a p p l i c a n t a u t h o r i z e d communication of h e B a r r e r a Work b y p o s t i n g i t on

h i s w e b s i t e and t h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s n o i n f r i n g e m e n t .



S~

Page: 14

[38] Counsel f o r t h e a p p l i c a n t a r g u e d t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t s c a n n o t r e l y o n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e B a r r e r a

Work wa s p o s t e d o n h e a p p l i c a n t ' s w e b s i t e b e c a u s e t h a t would amount t o " b l a m i n g t h e v i c t i m" .

However, h e a p p l i c a n t i s o n l y a v i c t i m o f n f r i n g e m e n t i f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s d i d s o m e t h i n g o n l y h e

h a s t h e r i g h t t o d o w i t h o u t h i s a u t h o r i z a t i o n . As h e r e s p o n d e n t s s u b m i t , t h e B a r r e r a Work wa s

w i t h i n t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s f u l l c o n t r o l a n d i f he d i d n o t w i s h i t t o be communicated by

t e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n , he c o u l d remove t from h i s w e b s i t e , a s he e v e n t u a l l y d i d .

[39] T h e r e f o r e , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n i n r e s p e c t ofthe B a r ► • e r a Work s a l s o d i s m i s s e d .

Damages C o s t s

[40] Th e r e s p o n d e n t s s u b m i t t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t has b r o u g h t t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f u s t i c e i n t o

d i s r e p u t e by making t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n and t h a t s i n c e i t c o n s t i t u t e s an abuse o f p r o c e s s , t h e Court

s h o u l d award p u n i t i v e or exemplary damages a g a i n s t t h e a p p l i c a n t . I a g e e w i t h t h e a p p l i c a n t t h a t

t h e d e f e n c e o f buse o f r o c e s s s n o t a p p l i c a b l e i n t h i s c a s e . Th e a p p l i c a t i o n wa s n o t f r i v o l o u s or

v e x a t i o u s , nor have t h e r e s p o n d e n t s s h o w n t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t u n n e c e s s a r i l y l e n g t h e n e d t h e

p r o c e e d i n g s or b r o u g h t u n n e c e s s a r y m o t i o n s .

[41] t appears h a t what t h e r e s p o n d e n t s a r e a c t u a l l y a r g u i n g i s t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n i s an abuse o f

p r o c e s s because t wa s b r o u g h t f o r a n i m p r o p e r , c o l l a t e r a l p u r p o s e . Th e a p p l i c a n t wa s o t s e e k i n g

t o e x e r c i s e h i s c o p y r i g h t , b u t r a t h e r wa s u s i n g t h e c o p y r i g h t r e g i m e as a m e a n s t o h a r a s s t h e

r e s p o n d e n t s because o f h e i r p o l i t i c a l v i e w s . Thus, what t h e r e s p o n d e n t s appear o a r g u e i s a c t u a l l y

t h e t o r t o f buse o f r o c e s s ; however, t h a t i s a e p a r a t e a c t i o n t h a t m ust be b r o u g h t b y h e



P a g e : 1 5

r e s p o n d e n t s . The C o u r t makes no comment on w h e t h e r t h e t o r t o f b u s e o f r o c e s s c o u l d be

e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h i s i n s t a n c e .

[42] The r e s p o n d e n t s a l s o a s k t h a t t h e C o u r t g r a n t c o s t s on t h e h i g h e s t s c a l e p e r m i t t e d .

However, h e y a g a i n h a v e n o t p r e s e n t e d any e v i d e n c e o f o n d u c t o f h e a p p l i c a n t d u r i n g t h i s

p r o c e e d i n g t h a t w o u l d w a r r a n t a h i g h e r c o s t award t h a n t h e n o r m . T h e r e f o r e , p a r t y - a n d - p a r t y c o s t s

i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h Column I I I o f a r i f f B r e awarded.0



P a g e : 16

JUDGMENT

THISCOURT'SJUDGMENT s t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w i s d i s m i s s e d w i t h

c o s t s t o t h e r e s p o n d e n t s . P a r t y - a n d - p a r t y c o s t s i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h Column I I I o f T a r i f F B r e

awarded.

' D o n a l d J . R e n n i e "

J u d g e

S~



FEDERALCOURT

SOLICITORS OFRECORD

DOCKET:

STYLEOFCAUSE:

PLACE OF EARING:

DATEOFHEARING:

REASONSFORJUDGMENTANDJUDGMENT:

DATED:

APP~ARANC~S:

Mr. James Katz

Mr. Mark o u r n i e r

Ms. onstance F o u r n i e r •

SOLICITORS OFRECORD:

B r a z e a u s e l l e r .LLP

Ottawa, n t a r i o

T-784-11

RICHARD WARMAN nd NATIONALPOST

COMPANY MARKFOURNIER nd CONSTANCE

FOURNIER

Ottawa

May 8, 01 2

RENNIE .

J u n e 21, 01 2

FOR HEAPPLICANT


FOR IC RESPONDENTS

FOR HEAPPLICANT


FOR'TI~RESPONDENTS

.

L

0





Page 1

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676, 33 A d t p i n . L.R. 229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 41 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41 , 3 . P . R . 3d ) 7 8 , 1989]2 . C . 88 ,89 N.R. 241

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676, 33 Admin. .R. 229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 8 9

N.R. 41 ,54 D.L.R. 4th) 41 , 3 . P . R . 3d) 7 8 , 1989]2 .C. 88, 89 N.R. 241

Canada D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n &Re s earch ) . A i r Canada

AMERICAN IRLINES INC, . COMPETITION TRIBUNAL t l .

F e d e r a l Court of anada, Court of ppeal

I a c o b u c c i C . J . , Heald and S t o n e J J .

Heard: c t o b e r 25, 1988

Judgment: November 1 0 , 1988

Docket: Doc. No. A -851-88

D homson R e u t e r s Canada L i m i t e d o r t s L i c e n s o r s e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u r t d o c u m e n t s ) . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

Counsel: C o l i n L. Campbell, o r a p p e l l a n t .

N . J . S h u l t z and Janet Y a l e , o r Consumers' s s o c i a t i o n of Canada.

C. Marshall and E. o t h s t e i n , o r r e s p o n d e n t s A i r Canada t d . , 153333 Canada L t d . p a r t n e r s h i p , A i r Canada S e r v i c e s

I n c .

JoAnne S t r e k a f , f o r r e s p o n d e n t s PWA orp. Canadian A i r l i n e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l L t d . , P a c i f i c Western A i r l i n e s L t d . ,

Canadian P a c i f i c A i r l i n e s L t d . , 154793 Canada t d . , 153333 Canada t d . p a r t n e r s h i p , A i r Canada S e r v i c e s I n c .

John Rook and T r e v o r W h i f f e n , o r D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n &Research.

No ne a p p e a r i n g f o r A t t o r n ey G e n e r a l of Manitoba r ' f o r W a r d a i r Canada n c .

S u b j e c t : I n t e l l e c t u a l P r o p e r t y ; P u b l i c ; P r o p e r t y ; C i v i l P r a c t i c e and P r o c e d u r e

P r a c t i c e -- - P a r t i e s—n t e r v e n o r s

D 013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Wo rk s



Page 2

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676,33 Admin. .R . 29, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) )89

N.R. 41 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41 , 3 C . P . R . 3d ) 7 8 , 1989]2 .C. 88 ,89 N.R. 41

P r a c t i c e - - - C o s t s — C o s t s of p p e a l s —Power f p p e l l a t e c o u r t t o award o s t s

S t a t u t e s -- - I n t e r p r e t a t i o n—x t r i n s i c a i d s—t a t u t e s i n p a r i m a t e r i a

I n t e r v e n o r s —Scope f n t e r v e n t i o n—o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l—owers of u p e r i o r Court w i t h r e s p e c t t o c o n d u c t of

p r o c e e d i n g s—i s c r e t i o n t o p e r m i t i n t e r v e n o r s t o make " r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " i n c l u d i n g a u t h o r i t y t o p e r m i t c a l l i n g of

e v i d e n c e , c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i o n of i t n e s s e s and p a r t i c i p a ti o n i n d i s c o v e r y—o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t , S . C . 1986, .

26, s . 8 ( 2 ) , ( 3 ) .

P r a c t i c e —Cos t s—e d e r a l Court of Appeal—ppeal from C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l —Where p p e a l t o b e r e a t e d a s

t r i a l from T r i a l D i v i s i o n , p r o v i s i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o a p p e a l s from T r i a l D i v i s i o n , n o t t r i b u n a l r e l e v a n t—u t h o r i t y t o

award o s t s b y e f e r e n c e , n t e r a l i a , t o s u c c e s s i n p r o c e e d i n g s—e d e r a l Court u l e s , r . 344, 1312.

Th e D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n &Research DIR) p p l i e d t o t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l under s . 6 4 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n

Act, o r an o r d e r d i s s o l v i n g a l i m i t e d p a r t n e r s h i p between A i r Canada(AC) nd a s u b s i d i a r y of Canadian A i r l i n e s

(CA) o r t h e j o i n t o p e r a t i o n of a c o m p u t e r i z e d r e s e r v a t i o n s y s t e m . I t w as a l l e g e d t h a t t h i s e f f e c t e d a l e s s e n i n g of

c o m p e t i t i o n c o n t r a r y t o t h e A c t .

American i r l i n e s( A A ) , ardair(W) nd t h e Consumers s s o c i a t i o n of anada(CAC) ll s o u g h t l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e

i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s and a l s o t o p a r t i c i p a t e f u l l y i n t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s b o t h a t t h e d i s c o v e r y and h e a r i n g s t a g e s ( e x c e p t

t h a tW i d n o t a s k t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n d i s c o v e r y ) .

Under s . 8(2) of h e Competition T r i b u n a l A c t , t h e T r i b u n a l w a s g i v e n a l l t h e "powers, i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s " of a

s u p e r i o r Court w i t h r e s p e c t t o a s e r i e s of p e c i f i c m a t t e r s a s w e l l a s " o t h e r m a t t e r s n e c e s s a r y o r p r o p e r f o r t h e du e

e x e r c i s e of t s j u r i s d i c t i o n " . A d d i t i o n a l ly , b y . 9 ( 3 ) , h e T r i b u n a l w as i v e n a i s c r e t i o n t o p e r m i t i n t e r v e n t i o n s b y an

a f f e c t e d p e r s o n " t o make e p r e s e n t a t i o n s r e l e v a n t t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g s i n r e s p e c t of ny m a t t e r t h a t a f f e c t s t h a t p e r s o n " .

Th e r i b u n a l h e l d t h a t l l t h e a p p l i c a n t s were e n t i t l e d t o i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s b u t t h a t t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n was o b e i m i t e d

t o t h e making of r a l o r w r i t t e n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s . According t o t h e T r i b u n a l , t d i d n o t have any d i s c r e t i o n t o a l l o w

wider a r t i c i p a t i o n . D e s p i t e t h e b r o a d d i s c r e t i o n c o n f e r r e d b y . 8(2) i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e conduct of t s p r o c e e d i n g s , h e

T r i b u n a l ' s powers w i t h r e s p e c t t o i n t e r v e n o r s were e x p l i c i t l y l i m i t e d b y s . 9(3) o t h e a l l o w i n g of r a l o r w r i t t e n

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s and d i d n o t e x t e n d t o t h e l e a d i n g of v i d e n c e , c r o s s -e x a m i n a t i o n of i t n e s s e s o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e

d i s c o v e r y p r o c e s s .

AA p p e a l e d and CAC r o s s- a p p e a l e d from t h i s r u l i n g t o t h e F e d e r a l Court of Appeal u n d e r s . 13 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n

Tribunal c t .

Held:

Th e a p p e a l and c r o s s- a p p e a l were a l l o w e d . Th e m a t t e r was e f e r r e d back t o t h e T r i b u n a l t o b e e a l t w i t h on t h e b a s i s

D 013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 3

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676,33 Admin. .R . 29, s u b nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) )8 9

N.R. 41 , 4 D . L . R . 4 t h ) 741, 3 C . P . R . 3d) 7 8 , 1989]2 . C . 8 8 , 89 N.R. 41

t h a t t h e T r i b u n a l had a i s c r e t i o n t o p e r m i t p a r t i c i p a t i o n of h e t y p e s o u g h t by h e i n t e r v e n o r s .

As a m a t t e r of r i n c i p l e , r i b u n a l s h a v e i n h e r e n t a u t h o r i t y t o c o n t r o l t h e i r p r o c e d u r e s t o e n s u r e t h e p r o p e r f u l f i l m e n t of

t h e i r s t a t u t o r y m a n d a t e . I n c l u d e d w i t h i n t h i s c o n c e p t was an a u t h o ri t y t o p e r m i t i n t e r v e n t i o n s . Where, s h e r e , t h a t

i n h e r e n t a u t h o r i t y was i v e n s t a t u t o r y b a c k i n g by a r o v i s i o n s u c h a s . 8 ( 2 ) q u a t i n g t h e T r i b u n a l w i t h s u p e r i o r c o u r t s

of e c o r d f o r s u c h p u r p o s e s , any l i m i t a t i o n on t h a t a u t h o r i t y r e q u i r e d c l e a r l y e x p r e s s e d l a n g u a g e . A g a i n s t t h i s b a c k -

g r o u n d , . 9(3) was o t so c l e a r l y e x p r e s s e d a s t o e l i m i n a t e t h e T r i b u n a l ' s a u t h o r i t y o r d i s c r e t i o n t o p e r m i t e x t e n s i v e

p a r t i c i p a t i o n by n t e r v e n o r s .

I n t e r m s of i c t i o n a r y d e f i n i t i o n s , t h e word " r e p r e s e n t a t i o n " d i d n o t e x c l u d e t h e a d d u c i n g of a c t s and r e a s o n s i n

s u p p o r t of r g u m e n t s b e i n g made. Moreover, o t h e e x t e n t t h a t . 9 ( 3 ) p o k e i n t e r m s of a t t e r s t h a t

" a f f e c t " t h e i n t e r v e n o r s , h e r e was a a s i s o r re a d i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i o n " n t h a t b r o a d e r s e n s e of n a b l i n g t h e i n t e r v e n o r s

t o p a r t i c i p a t e f u l l y and e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o s u c h m a t t e r s . The s i m p l e f a c t t h a t t h e y were n o t p a r t i e s and t h e

p r i n c i p a l l i s was between t h e d i r e c t o r and t h e p e r s o n s a g a i n s t w h o m a n o r d e r was s o u g h t d i d n o t n e c e s s i t a t e a r e -

s t r i c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " and t h e c o n c o m i t a n t r e q ui r e m e n t t h a t t h e i n t e r v e n o r s r e l y on t h e d i r e c t o r

f o r a d d u c i n g e v i d e n c e on t h e i r b e h a l f . Nor would t h e i r b r o a d e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n n e c e s s a r i l y compromise t h e e s s e n t i a l

n a t u r e of h e p r o c e e d i n g s between t h e d i r e c t o r and t h e named p a r t i e s .

T h i s c o n c l u s i o n was e i n f o r c e d by t h e e n t i r e c o n t e x t of h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t and t h e n a t u r e of h e p r o c e e d i n g s u n d e r

t h a t A c t . i r s t , t h e p r e a m b l e t o t h e Act o n t e m p l a t e d w i d e s p r e a d e f f e c t s o f a n t i -c o m p e t i t i v e b e h a v i o u r , h i s s u g g e s t i n g

( w h en r e a d w i t h t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n f o r i n t e r v e n t i o n ) h e n e e d f o r e f f e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n by t h o s e c l a i m i n g t o be

a f f e c t e d by u c h b e h a v i o u r . S e c o n d l y , h i s was e i n f o r c e d by . 65 of h e Act and t h e r a n g e of a c t o r s t o be a k e n i n t o

a c c o u n t by t h e T r i b u n a l i n c o n s i d e r i n g w h e t h e r t o o r d e r t h e d i s s o l u t i o n of m e r g e r ; g i v e n t h a t r a n g e , h e i n t e r v e n o r s

c o u l d be w e l l - p o s i t i o n e d t o p r o v i d e t h e T r i b u n a l w i t h n e c e s s a r y i n s i g h t s p o s s i b l e o n l y t h r o u g h f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n .

T h i r d l y , t was o t n c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t i n some a s e s t h e i n t e r e s t s of h e i n t e r v e n o r s and t h e d i r e c t o r would be i f f e r e n t

a n d , i n s u c h c a s e s , i t would n o t be a i r t o r e s t r i c t t h e i n t e r v e n o r s t o p r e s e n t i n g e v i d e n c e t h r o u g h t h e d i r e c t o r w i t h

r e s p e c t t o m a t t e r s

" a f f e c t [ i n g ] " them. n d e e d , t h e A c t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n t o t h e T r i b u n a l t o a c t b o t h i n f o r m a l l y and e x p e d i t i o u s l y was c o n d i -

t i o n e d by t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of a i r n e s s . F i n a l l y , w h i l e t h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t and t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l Act were

s t a t u t e s i n p a r i m a t e r i a , t h i s d i d n o t n e c e s s i t a t e t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h e t e r m " r e p r e s e n t a t i o n " c o n s i s t e n t l y t h r o u g h o u t

b o t h s t a t u t e s . Thus, h e f a c t t h a t , u n d e r t h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t , t h e d i r e c t o r was a u t h o r i z e d t o b o t h c a l l e v i d e n c e a nd

make r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s i n p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l a g e n c i e s d i d n o t n e c e s s i t a t e a f i n d i n g t h at e l s e -

where making r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s e x c l u d e d t h e c a l l i n g of v i d e n c e . Th e meaning of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " had t o be d e t e r -

mined by e f e r e n c e t o t h e s p e c i f i c c o n t e x t i n which t o c c u r r e d .

Given t h a t a p p e a l s from t h e T r i b u n a l were t o be t r e a t e d a s t h o u g h a p p e a l s from t h e F e d e r a l C o u r t , T r i a l D i v i s i o n

( C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l c t , . 1 3 ( 1 ) ) , o s t s were o be awarded on h e same a s i s a s on p p e a l s from t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n

( r . 344) s opposed o . 1312 which p r o v i d e d t h a t , n a p p e a l s t o t h e C o u r t from r i b u n a l s ,no o s t s were p a y a b l e e x c e p t

f o r s p e c i a l r e a s o n s . By i r t u e of . 344, h e C o u r t had a o m p l e t e d i s c r e t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o c o s t s t h o u g h s u b j e c t t o a i s t

of a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g s u c c e s s i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . A c c o r d i n g l y , o s t s would be awarded h e r e i f o u g h t .

O 013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No l a i m t o O r i g . G o v t . Works



Page4

1988 CarswellNat 676,33 Admin. .R . 29, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada Competition T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 41 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41, 3 C.P.R. 3d ) 178, 1989)2 .C . 88, 89 N.R. 41

Cases considered:

Fishing V e s s e l Owner's A s s n . of .C . . Canada (A.G.)~I985), C.P.C. 2d 312, S7 N.R. 37 6 Fed. C.A.)

considered

S t a t u t e s considered:

Combines I n v e s t i g a t i o n Act, R.S.C. 1970, . C-23 [now R.S.C. 1985, c . C- 3 4 ; renamed Competition Ac t b y

R.S.C. 1985 2nd S u p p . ) , c . 1 9 , . 19 ]-P a r t VII

s . 1 . 1

s . 47, s n . 1986, . 26, .47

s . 60, s en. 1986, . 26, .47

s . 64, s n . 1986, . 26, .47

s . 73, s e n . 1986, . 26, .47

s . 76, s en. 1986, . 26, .47

s . 77, s e n . 1986, . 26, .47

s . 97, s en. 1986, . 26, .47

s . 98 , s n . 1986, . 26, .47

s . 100, s e n . 1986, . 26, . 47

Competition T r i b u n a l Act, S.C. 1986, . 26, t . I

s . 8

s .9

s . 13(1)

D 0 13 Thomson e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works

~y



~Page 5

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676, 33 Admin. .R . 29, s ub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 41 , 4 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 741, 3 C . P . R . 3d ) 7 8 , 1989]2 . C . 88 ,89 N.R. 241

s. 16

s. 17

Rules c o n s i d e r e d :

F e d e r a l Court R u l e s—

r . 344, s e n . SOR/87—21, . 2

r . 1203

r . 1312

A u t h o r i t i e s c o n s i d e r e d :

S h o r t e r Oxford D i c t i o n a r y " r e p r e s e n t a t i o n".Words and phrases o n s i d e r e d :

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n

APPEAL nd CROSS-APPEAL rom d e c i s i o n of C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l w i t h r e s p e c t t o s c o p e of a r t i c i p a t i o n i n

p r o c e e d i n g s b y n t e r v e n o r s .

Th e judgment of h e Co u rt wa s e l i v e r e d b y Iacobucci . J . :

1 T h i s s an a p p e a l b y American i r l i n e s I n c .(American" r a p p e l l a n t" ) , p u r s u a n t o s . 13(1) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n

T r i b u n a l c t , S.C. 1986, . 26, rom t h e o r d e r of t r a y e r J . of h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l w i t h r e s p e c t t o an a p p l i c a t i o n

b y American o i n t e r v e n e , p u r s u a n t t o s . 9(3) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l c t , n a r o c e e d i n g b e f o r e t h e C o m p e t i t i o n

T r i b u n a l .

2 Th e p r o c e e d i n g i n q u e s t i o n was i n s t i t u t e d b y t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of h e D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n and R e s e a r c h

(D i r e c t o r") o r , amongst t h e r t h i n g s , an o r d e r under . 6 4 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t , R . S . C . 1970, . C- 2 3 , a s amended,

and f o r an n t e r i m o r d e r under s . 7 6 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t . FNl I n e f f e c t , t h e D i r e c t o r has a l l e g e d t h a t A i r Canada

and Canadian A i r l i n e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l L i m i t e d and o t h e r named p a r t i e s have formed a merger of h e computer r e s e r v a -

t i o n s systems of Air Canada and Canadian A i r l i n e s I n t e r n a t i o n a l L i m i t e d which p r e v e n t s o r l e s s e n s , o r i s l i k e l y t o

p r e v e n t o r l e s s e n , c o m p e t i t i o n s u b s t a n t i a l l y w i t h i n t h e meaning of . 6 4 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t , i n t h e p r ov i s i o n of

computer e s e r v a t i o n system s e r v i c e s t o a i r l i n e s , t r a v e l a g e n t s and consumers n Canada.

R e q u e s t s t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g were l s o f i l e d b y Wardair Canada n c .(Wardair" ) , and h e Consumers'

O 013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 6

1988 CarswellNat 676, 33 Admin. .R . 29, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) )8 9

N.R. 241 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41 , 3 C . P . R .(3d) 7 8 , 1989]2 .C. 88, 9 N.R. 41

A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada(CAC" ) . Th e o r d e r of t r a y e r J . gave l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s t o American,

Wardair and CAC nd, n p a r t i c u l a r , a l l o w e d t hem t o a t t e n d and p r e s e n t argument on l l m o t i o n s and a t l l p r e -h e a r i n g

c o n f e r e n c e s and h e a r i n g s , on any m a t t e r a f f e c t i n g them, e s p e c t i v e l y .

4 American, u p p o r t e d b y CAC, p p e a l s b e c a u s e of h e l i m i t e d scope of h e i n t e r v e n t i o n a f f o r d e d b y h e o r d e r of

S t r a y e r J . CAC as p p e a l e d t o t h i s Court b y w a y f c r o s s - a p p e a l p u r s u a n t t o s . 1203 of h e F e d e r a l Court R u l e s . t i s

noteworthy h a t t h e D i r e c t o r s u p p o r t s t h e arguments of h e a p p e l l a n t and o t h e r i n t e r v e n o r s f o r an n c r e a s e d r o l e i n t h e i r

i n t e r v e n t i o n .

5 Th e a p p e l l a n t a r g u e s i n s h o r t t h a t S t r a y e r J . e r r e d i n l aw i n h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of . 9(3) of h e C o m p e t i t i o n

T r i b u n a l Ac t which had t h e e f f e c t of p r e v e n t i n g t h e i n t e r v e n o r s from p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n e x a m i n a t i o n f o r d i s c o v e r y ,

c a l l i n g e v i d e n c e , and c r o s s-examining w i t n e s s e s . PN2

6 I am f h e view t h a t t h e a p p e a l and r o s s -a p p e a l s h o u l d b e a l l o w e d , b u t b e f o r e s e t t i n g o u t my e a s o n s , would

l i k e t o r e f e r t o p a r t s of h e judgment p p e a l e d from b e c a u s e of h e i m p o r t a n c e of h e i s s u e t o p r o c e e d i n g s under t h e

C o m p e t i t i o n Act and b e c a u s e of h e a d m i r a b l y comprehensive a p p r o a c h t a k e n b y t r a y e r J . i n h i s r e a s o n i n g .

7 At h e o u t s e t I t h i n k i t a p p r o p r i a t e t o r e f e r t o s .9 f h e C o m pe t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t , which p r o v i d e s as o l l o w s :

9 . 1 ) h e r i b u n a l i s a o u r t of e c o r d and s h a l l have an o f f i c i a l s e a l which h a l l b e u d i c i a l l y n o t i c e d .

( 2 ) l l p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l s h a l l be d e a l t w i t h a s i n f o r m a l l y and e x p e d i t i o u s l y a s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s

and o n s i d e r a t i o n s of a i r n e s s p e r m i t .

( 3) Any p e r s o n may, i t h l e a v e of h e T r i b u n a l , i n t e r v e n e i n any p r o c e e d i n g s b e f or e t h e T r i b u n a l t o make e p -

r e s e n t a t i o n s r e l e v a n t t o t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s i n r e s p e c t of ny m a t t e r t h a t a f f e c t s t h a t p e r s o n .

[Emphasis a d d e d ] .

Judgment appealed from

8 S t r a y e r J . i n t e r p r e t e d " r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " i n s . 9(3) o mean "arguments" and h e l d t h a t t h e s e c t i o n c o u l d n o t be

t a k e n t o i n c l u d e t h e r i g h t s c l a i m e d b y t h e i n t e r v e n or s , v i z . , p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n d i s c o v e r y , c a l l i n g e v i d e n c e and

c r o s s-examining w i t n e s s e s . I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n , he t a t e d :

S u b s e c t i o n 9(3) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l Ac t u t h o r i z e s any p e r s o n , w i t h l e a v e of h e T r i b u n a l , o ' i n t e r v e n e . . .

t o make e p r e s e n t a t i o n s . ' T h e f i r s t p o i n t t o n o t e i s t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t y i s g i v e n t o i n t e r v e n e f o r a p a r t i c u l a r p u r p o s e

o n l y , and one t h e r e f o r e c a n n o t d e r i v e any b r o a d e r a u t h o r i t y b y r e f e r e n c e t o o t h e r meanings which t h e term i n -

t e r v e n e ' m a y have n o t h e r c o n t e x t s . Th e e r m ' t o make e p r e s e n t a t i o n s ' i n normal n g l i s h u s a g e would u g g e s t t h e

p r e s e n t a t i o n of rgument; h a t i s , p e r s u a s i o n r a t h e r t h a n p r o o f . I f t h e r e i s any i n g e r i n g a m b i g u i t y of h i s term i n

t h e E n g l i s h v e r s i o n , i t a p p e a r s t o be c l a r i f i e d i n t h e French v e r s i o n which s t a t e s t h e p u r p o s e of a p e r m i t t e d i n -

O 013 Thomson R e ~ i t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Wo rks



Page 7

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676,33 Admin. .R . 229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 241 ,54 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 741, 3 C . P . R . 3d ) 7 8 , 1989]2 . C . 88, 89 N.R. 241

t e r v e n t i o n a s ' a f i n de p r e s e n t e r de s o b s e r v a t i o n s ' . The term ' o b s e r v a t i o n s ' i s most commonly a p p l i e d t o t h e

p r e s e n t a t i o n of omments r argument e f o r e a o u r t o r t r i b u n a l .

[Appeal Book, ages 14- 1 5 ] .

9 S t r a y e r J . s a i d t h a t t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of . 9(3) a s t r e n g t h e n e d b y e f e r e n c e t o s s . 9 7 nd 98 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n

Ac t which a u t h o r i z e s t h e D i r e c t o r t o p a r t i c i p a t e b e f o r e f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l , r e s p e c t i v e l y , b o a r d s and a g e n c i e s . I n

each of h o s e s e c t i o n s t h e D i r e c t o r i s a u t h o r i z e d t o "make r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o and a l l e v i d e n c e " b e f o r e t h e Board.A

d i s t i n c t i o n i s t h u s made between e p r e s e n t a t i o n s and h e c a l l i n g of v i d e n c e , which s s u p p o r t e d i n t h e French v e r s i o n

of h e t wo s e c t i o n s : " p r e s e n t e r de s o b s e r v a t i o n s e t de s p r e u v e s " i n s . 97, nd p r e s e n t e r de s o b s e r v a t i o n s e t s o u m e t t r e

de s 8 1 ~ m e n t s de p r e u v e " i n s . 98. Because S t r a y e r J . found t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l Act and t h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t n

p a r i m a t e r i a he s t a t e d t h a t s i m i l a r l a n g u a g e i n t h e t wo t a t u t e s s h o u l d b e i v e n s i m i l a r m e a n i n g s . c c o r d i n g l y , i n c e i n

s s . 97 and 98 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " do o t i n c l u d e t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of v i d e n c e , so t s h o u l d b e n s .

9(3) of h e C o m pe t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t , namely, h a t "making r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " s h o u l d n o t i n c l u d e t h e c a l l i n g of v i -

d e n c e .

10 I n r e a c h i n g t h i s c o n c l u s i o n , S t r a y e r J . a l s o n o t e d t h a t t o g r a n t t h e i n t e r v e n o r s t h e r o l e t h e y wished would b e

tantamount t o t r e a t i n g them a s p a r t i e s , and under t h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t o n l y t h e D i r e c t o r can a p p l y f o r o r d e r s a g a i n s t

s p e c i f i e d p e r s o n s . Thus t h e o n l y p a r t i e s i n p r o c e e d i n g s under t h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t a r e t o b e t h e D i r e c t o r and t h e

p e r s o n s a g a i n s t whom r d e r s a r e s o u g h t . He o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t does o t p r o v i d e any p r i v a t e r i g h t of

a c t i o n a g a i n s t t h e p a r t i e s t o an a n t i-c o m p e t i t i v e merger s i n c e t h e o n l y a c t i o n c o n t e m p l a t e d i s one t a k e n b y t h e Di-

r e c t o r .

1 1 S t r a y e r J . a l s o found t h a t t h e g e n e r a l i m p l i e d a u t h o r i t y of Court o p e r m i t i n t e r v e n t i o n s on terms t t h i n k s i t

wa s e s t r i c t e d b y h e l i m i t i n g l a n g u a g e of . 9(3) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l c t . n a d d i t i o n , n l o o k i n g a t t h e c o n t e x t

of h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t , t r a y e r J . was of h e view t h a t p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l were u s t i c i a b l e i n

n a t u r e which i n h i s view r e i n f o r c e d a narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of . 9 ( 3 ) . I n t h i s r e s p e c t , he s a i d :

I t i s q u i t e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e view t h a t P a r l i a m e n t h a s i n e f f e c t c r e a t e d a i s between t h e D i r e c t o r of n v e s t i g a t i o n

and R e s e a r c h and t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e m e r g e r ; a i s which i s d e t e r m i n e d on t h e b a s i s of h e f a c t s and t h e la w f o r

which t h e p r o p e r p a r t i e s t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g s have h e prime e s p o n s i b i l i t y of r e s e n t a t i o n . n such a o n t e x t t i s n o t

i n a p p r o p r i a t e t h a t t h e p o t e n t i a l r o l e of n t e r v e n a n t s b e u i t e l i m i t e d , nor can an n t e r p r e t a t i o n of u b s e c t i o n 9(3) o

t h i s e f f e c t b e c o n s i d e r e d a b s u r d o r i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e g e n e r a l p u r p o s e s of h e A c t . t wa s open t o P a r l i a m e n t t o

a l l o w anyone p o t e n t i a l l y a g g r i e v e d b y a merger t o commence a p r o c e e d i n g b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l a g a i n s t t h e

merging p a r t i e s , b u t P a r l i a m e n t e l e c t e d n o t t o do s o . I n s t e a d i t o b v i o u s l y s a w t h e commencement of uch a p r o -

c e e d i n g and t s d i r e c t i o n a s a m a t t e r i n v o l v i n g an i m p o r t a n t p u b l i c i n t e r e s t which wa s o be d e f i n e d and p u r s u e d

b y t h e D i r e c t o r , a p u b l i c o f f i c e r , a s he t h i n k s b e s t i n t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . I n such c i r c u m s t a n c e s t i s i r r e l e v a n t t h a t

o t h e r p e r s o n s might a k e a d i f f e r e n t view of when o r how such p r o c e e d i n g s h o u l d be c o n d u c t e d . T h e i r a s s i s t a n c e

w i l l no doubt be welcomed b y t h e D i r e c t o r i n t h e development of v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i v e of h e a l l e g a t i o n s he h a s

made b u t t i s he who ha s t h e c a r r i a g e of h e p r o c e e d i n g . t i s he who, o g e t h e r w i t h t h e r e s p o n d e n t s , h a s t h e u l -

t i m a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of h a p i n g t h e i s s u e s and, n d e e d , of e t t l i n g t h e m a t t e r ( s u b j e c t t o t h e a p p r o v a l of h e T r i -

b u n a l s h o u l d a c o n s e n t o r d e r b e r e q u i r e d ) .

O 0 1 . 3 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



•Page 8

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676, 33 Admin. .R . 229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 41 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41, 3 C . P . R . 3d) 7 8 , 1989]2 . C . 88 ,89 N.R. 41

[Appeal Book, p . 2 2- 2 3 ] .

12 S t r a y e r J . a l s o p o i n t e d t o s. 9(2) which d i r e c t s t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l t o d e a l w i t h a l l p r o c e e d i n g s " a s i n -

f o r m a l l y and e x p e d i t i o u s l y a s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s and c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of a i r n e s s p e r m i t" . I n h i s view a l l o w i n g i n t e r -

v e n o r s t o p r o l o n g p r o c e e d i n g s t h r o u g h t h e m u l t i p l i c a t i o n of i t n e s s e s and c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i o n of i t n e s s e s c o u l d o n l y

l e a d t o d e l a y i n g t h e d e c i s i o n s of h e T r i b u n a l and d i s c o u r a g e u s e of t . T hu s a narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of r e p r e s e n t a -

t i o n s " i n s . 9(3) w as u s t i f i e d . By ay of i n a l comment, t r a y e r J . r e f e r r e d t o t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n r o l e of r o v i n c i a l and

f e d e r a l A t t o r n e y s G e n e r a l i n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c a s e s a t t h e a p p e l l a t e l e v e l and t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y had n o t been h a n d i c a p p e d

unduly i n t h e i r i n t e r v e n t i o n s by n o t h a v i n g been i n v o l v e d a t t h e t r i a l l e v e l i n t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of e v i d e n c e and

c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i o n of i t n e s s e s . He a i d :

Th e o l e of h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l i n merger p r o c e e d i n g s s more a k i n t o t h a t of o u r t t h a n t o t h a t of p u b l i c

i n q u i r y and t i s n o t a b s u r d , l l o g i c a l , o r demeaning h a t non - p a r t i e s t o such p r o c e e d i n g s have o n l y a i m i t e d p a r t

t o p l a y . I f t h e y have e v i d e n c e t o p r o v i d e which would be h e l p f u l t o one of h e a u t h o r i z e d p a r t i e s t o t h e s e p r o -

c e e d i n g s t i s d i f f i c u l t t o b e l i e v e such p a r t y w i l l n o t welcome h e i r a s s i s t a n c e . Bu t f h e y want o r a i s e ne w s s u e s

which n e i t h e r p a r t y i s p r e p a r e d t o embrace, h e y c a n n o t do so b e c a u s e t h a t would be i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e a d -

v e r s a r i a l system which P a r l i a m e n t h a s p r e s c r i b e d .

[Appeal Book, . 2 8 ] .

I s s u e b e f o r e the Court

13 With h i s background and r e v i e w of h e r e a s o n s of t r a y e r . , t h e i s s u e b e f o r e us o c u s s e s on h e meaning of .

9(3) of h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t . I n d e e d , e v e r y p a r t y a p p e a r i n g b e f o re t h i s Court a g r e e s w i t h t h e o b s e r v a t i o n

made b y S t r a y e r J . t h a t , were t n o t f o r s. 9 ( 3 ) , h e T r i b u n a l would have m p l i e d a u t h o r i t y t o p e r m i t i n t e r v e n o r s t o c a l l

e v i d e n c e and c r o s s-examine w i t n e s s e s . Th e i s s u e t h e n i s w h e t h e r s. 9(3) e s t r i c t s i n t e r v e n o r s i n t h e manner h e l d b y

S t r a y e r J . o r w h e t h e r , a s c o n t e n d e d b y h e a p p e l l a n t s , s . 9(3) oe s o t p r e v e n t t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l from u s i n g t s

d i s c r e t i o n t o d e c i d e t h e r o l e t h a t i n t e r v e n o r s w i l l p l a y .

Reasons f o r a l l o w i n g t h e appeal

14 A s e f u l s t a r t i n g p o i n t t o answer h e i s s u e b e f o r e us s t h e p r i n c i p l e , which s w i d e l y r e c o g n i z e d and a c c e p t e d ,

t h a t C o u r t s and t r i b u n a l s a r e t h e m a s t e r s of h e i r ow n p r o c e d u r e s . As a p a r t of h i s p r i n c i p l e , C o u r t s have a l s o been

r e c o g n i z e d a s h a v i n g an n h e r e n t a u t h o r i t y o r power o p e r m i t n t e r v e n t i o n s b a s i c a l l y on terms and o n d i t i o n s t h a t t h e y

b e l i e v e a r e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T h i s p r i n c i p l e w as l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d by t h i s Court n t h e F i s h i n g V e s -

s e l -Owne rs s s o c i at i o n F i s h i n g 6 ' e r s e l O t i ~ ~ n e r _ s . ' A s s n . _ o B. , . Canada 1 9 8 5 ) 1 1 . _ C P _ C _ . ~ 2 d ) 3l 2 t . 31957 .R.

376 a t 3g 1 (Fed. . A . I ] a s e :

Every r i b u n a l h a s t h e fundamental power o c o n t r o l t s ow n r o c e d u r e i n o r d e r t o e n s u r e t h a t u s t i c e s done. h i s ,

however, s s u b j e c t t o any i m i t a t i o n s or r o v i s i o n s imposed on t by h e law e n e r a l l y , by t a t u t e or by h e r u l e s of




Page 9

1988 C a r s w e l l N a t 676, 33 Admin. .R . 229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 241 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41, 3 C . P . R . 3d ) 7 8 , 1989]2 . C . 88 ,89 N.R. 241

C o u r t . Emphasis a d d e d ] .

I S With r e s p e c t t o t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l , t i s c l e a r l y s t a t e d i n i t s s t a t u t e t h a t t h e T r i b u n a l s g i v e n c o u r t- l i k e

powers and a c o n c o m i t a n t p r o c e d u r a l d i s c r e t i o n t o d e a l w i t h m a t t e r s b e f o r e i t : s e e s s. 8 , ( 1 ) , 16 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n

T r i b u n a l c t . FN3 Of a r t i c u l a r r e l e v a n c e s s e c t i o n 8 ( 2 ) :

8 . 2 ) h e r i b u n a l h a s , w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e a t t e n d a n c e , w e a r i n g and x a m i n a t i o n of i t n e s s e s , h e p r o d u c t i o n and

i n s p e c t i o n of documents, h e e n f o r c e m e n t of t s o r d e r s and o t h e r m a t t e r s n e c e s s a r y o r p r o p e r f o r t h e due e x e r c i s e

of t s j u r i s d i c t i o n , l l such powers, i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s a s a r e v e s t e d i n a s u p e r i o r c o u r t of e c o r d .

16 Th e p r i n c i p l e of a C o u r t ' s a u t h o r i t y and d i s c r e t i o n o v e r i t s p r o c e d u r e i s so f u n d a m e n t a l t o t h e p r o p e r f u n c -

t i o n i n g of Court and t h e i n t e r e s t s of u s t i c e t h a t , i n my i e w , o n l y c l e a r l y e x p r e s s e d l a n g u a g e i n a C o u r t ' s c o n s t a t i n g

s t a t u t e o r o t h e r a p p l i c a b l e law s h o u l d be employed t o t a k e away t h a t a u t h o r i t y and d i s c r e t i o n . W h e n one l o o k s a t t h e

d i c t i o n a r y meaning of h e o p e r a t i v e words u s e d i n s . 9 s w e l l a s t h e c o n t e x t of h e s e c t i o n and of h e p r o c e e d i n g s

under t h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t , I do n o t t h i n k t h a t t h e wording of . 9(3) s c l e a r l y e x p r e s s l y t o e l i m i n a t e t h e T r i b u n a l ' s

i n h e r e n t a u t h o r i t y o r d i s c r e t i o n i n t h e manner found b y S t r a y e r J .

17 S e c t i o n 9(3) l l o w s p e r s o n s t o i n t e r v e n e , w i t h l e a v e of h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l , " t o make r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

r e l e v a n t t o t h e ] p r o c e e d i n g s n r e s p e c t of ny m a t t e r t h a t a f f e c t s t h a t p e r s o n " . To s c e r t a i n t h e meaning of h e words n

t h e s e c t i o n one s h o u l d look n o t o n l y a t t h e d i c t i o n a r y d e f i n i t i o n and t h e c o n t e x t b u t a l s o a t t h e n a t u r e of h e m a t t e r s

b e i n g d e a l t w i t h i n t h e a c t i o n a s w e l l a s t h e o v e r a l l o b j e c t i v e s of h e u n d e r l y i n g l e g i s l a t i o n .

18 I n t h e S h o r t e r Oxford D i c t i o n a r y , r e p r e s e n t a t i o n " s s t a t e d t o mean, mong t h e r t h i n g s , h e f o l l o w i n g , which

I f i n d a p p l i c a b l e t o s. 9 ( 3 ) :

. . . a f o r m a l and s e r i o u s s t a t e m e n t of a c t s , r e a s o n s o r a r g u m e n t s made w i t h a view t o e f f e c t i n g some change,

p r e v e n t i n g some a c t i o n , e t c . .

[Emphasis a d d e d ] .

19 S t r a y e r J . chose t o r e s t r i c t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o mean o n l y "argument" n t h e s e n s e of e r s u a s i o n and n o t p r o o f .

Under S t r a y e r J . ' s r e a s o n i n g , t h e a c t s o r r e a s o n s r e l i e d on by i n t e r v e n o r s t o s u p p o r t t h e i r arguments would b e p r o -

v i d e d b y h e D i r e c t o r (or p o s s i b l y b y h e p a r t y a g a i n s t whom h e D i r e c t o r was e e k i n g an o r d e r ) .

20 Bu t t i s i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t s . 9(3) l l o w s p e r s o n s t o i n t e r v e n e t o make r e p r e se n t a t i o n s r e l e v a n t t o t h o s e

p r o c e e d i n g s i n r e s p e c t of ny m a t t e r t h a t a f f e c t s t h a t p e r s o n . t i s e x p r e s s l y r e c o g n i z e d t h a t o r d e r s of h e T r i b u n a l c o u l d

b e made h a t would a f f e c t t h e i n t e r v e n o r s , such a s i n t h e c a s e a t B a r . f h e i n t e r v e n o r s can make a s t a t e m e n t of a c t s ,

r e a s o n s o r argument on m a t t e r s t h a t a f f e c t them, h e q u e s t i o n a r i s e s w h e t h e r t h e y s h o u l d be a l l o w e d , a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n

of h e Court i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e d i s c u s s e d above, o c a l l e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e a c t s which

would s how t h e manner n which t h e i n t e r v e n o r was a f f e c t e d b y h e p r o c e e d i n g . S i m i l a r l y , on e can q u e s t i o n w h y h e

i n t e r v e n o r s c a n n o t e n s u r e t h a t t h e i r argument r r e a s o n s a r e s u p p o r t e d by a c t s t h a t t h e y have had t h e chance o prove




~-Page 10

1988 CarswellNat 676,33 Admin. .R . 29, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada Competition T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 41 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41, 3 C.P.R. 3d ) 78 , 1989]2 .C . 88 ,89 N.R. 41

i n e v i d e n c e .

21 I t seems o me h a t t i s not a a t i s f a c t o r y answer o say h a t t h e D i r e c t o r must be e l i e d on o e s t a b l i s h t h e f a c t s

(or e a s o n s ) o r t h e i n t e r v e n o r s because only h e D i r e c t o r i s a a r t y , o r o n l y t h e D i r e c t o r and h e p e r s o n s a g a i n s t whom

an o r d e r i s sought r e t h e p a r t i e s o r have a i s between them, r t h a t t h e D i r e c t o r must av e a r r i a g e of h e p r o c e e d i n g s

under h e Competition c t .

22 I f a i l t o s e e h o w a l l o w i n g i n t e r v e n o r s t o have an f f e c t i v e and meaningful n t e r v e n t i o n t o e n s u r e t h e y a r e a b l e

t o s h o w how hey could be f f e c t e d b y an r d e r , l l s u b j e c t o t h e d i s c r e t i o n and u p e r v i s i o n of h e T r i b u n a l , cannot be

r e c o n c i l e d w i t h t h e a d v e r s a r i a l or u s t i c i a b l e n a t u r e of r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l . Moreover such a r o l e f o r

i n t e r v e n o r s w i l l not e c e s s a r i l y d i s p l a c e t h e s t a t u s of h e p a r t i e s b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l , h e c a r r i a g e of h e m a t t e r b y h e

D i r e c t o r , o r t h e l i s n a t u r e of h e p r o c e e d i n g s . I am o n f i d e n t t h a t t h e p r e s i d i n g members of h e Competition T r i b u n a l

can d e a l w i t h t h e m a t t e r s t o g i v e r e s p e c t t o t h o s e concerns f or as needed.

23 My o n c l u s i o n on h i s meaning of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " f o r t h e purpose of . 9(3) f h e Competition T r i b u n a l Ac t

i s s t r e n g t h e n e d w h e n one looks o t h e wider o n t e x t and a t u r e of h e p r o c e e d i n g s under h e Competition A c t .

24 Th e purpose of h e Competition Ac t s s h o w n n s . 1 . 1 t h e r e o f s e x t r e m e l y b r o a d :

1 . 1 Th e purpose of h i s Ac t s t o m a i n t a i n and encourage o m p e t i t i o n i n Canada n o r d e r t o promote h e e f f i c i e n c y

and a d a p t a b i l i t y of h e Canadian economy, n o r d e r t o expand o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r Canadian p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n world

markets w h i l e a t h e same time e c o g n i z i n g t h e r o l e of o r e i g n c o m p e t i t i o n i n Canada, n o r d e r t o e n s u r e t h a t small

and medium- s i z e d e n t e r p r i s e s have an q u i t a b l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e Canadian economy and n o r d e r

t o p r o v i d e consumer w i t h c o m p e t i t i v e p r i c e s and p r o d u c t c h o i c e s .

25 I t i s e v i d e n t from h e purpose c l a u s e t h a t t h e e f f e c t s of n t i-c o m p e t i t i v e b e h a v i o u r , such as a merger h a t has

t h e r e s u l t of u b s t a n t i a l l y l e s s e n i n g c o m p e t i t i o n , can be widespread and of r e a t i n t e r e s t t o many p e r s o n s . I n t h e s e

m a t t e r s , Parliament has provided o r t h e D i r e c t o r t o s e r v e a s t h e g u a r d i a n of h e c o m p e t i t i o n e t h i c and h e i n i t i a t o r of

T r i b u n a l p r o c e e d i n g s under P t . VII of h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t ; but a r l i a m e n t has a l s o p r o v i d e d a means o e n s u r e t h a t

t h o s e who may e a f f e c t e d can p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s i n o r d e r t o inform t h e T r i b u n a l of h e w a y s i n which

m a t t e r s complained of mpact on them. would a s c r i b e t o P a r l i a m e n t t h e i n t e n t i o n t o p e r m i t t h o s e i n t e r v e n o r s not only

t o p a r t i c i p a t e but l s o t o do so f f e c t i v e l y . A e s t r i c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of . 9(3) ould n some a s e s run c o u n t e r t o t h e

e f f e c t i v e h a n d l i n g of i s p u t e s coming b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l .

2 6 At s s u e i n t h e c a s e b e f o r e us s , among o t h e r t h i n g s , an o r d e r f o r d i s s o l u t i o n , p u r s u a n t t o s . 64 of h e Com-

p e t i t i o n A c t , of h e merger of omputer e s e r v a t i o n systems n t h e a i r l i n e b u s i n e s s . S e c t i o n 6 5 1 i s t s v a r i o u s f a c t o r s t h a t

t h e T r i b u n a l may o n s i d e r i n d e c i d i n g whether o i s s u e such an o r d e r . These a c t o r s a r e f a i r l y broad and t would seem

r e a s o n a b l e t o assume h a t p e r s o n s a t t a i n i n g i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s under . 9(3)could bewell-p o s i t i o n e d t o p r o v i d e i n s i g h t s

concerning t h em through argument and r e a s o n s based on a c t s . Moreover h e y a r g u a b l y c o u l d more e f f e c t i v e l y and

e f f i c i e n t l y prove h e s e f a c t s i f they have h e a b i l i t y t o l e a d e v i d e n c e o r c r o s s -examine w i t n e s s e s depending on h e i s s u e

i n v o l v e d and h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of h e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e .

O O 2013 Thomson e u t e r s . No laim o O r i g . Govt. Wo rk s



~/

Page 1 1

1988 CarsweilNat 676,33 Admin. .R . 29, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l ) ) 8 9

N.R. 41, 4 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 741, 3 . P . R . 3d ) 78, 1989]2 . C . 88, 9 N. R. 41

2 7 I t seems o me h a t p e r m i t t i n g i n t e r v e n o r s t o p l a y a o l e w i d e r t h a n s i m p l y p r e s e n t i n g argument s a l s o a a i r e r

w ay of r e a t i n g them. Although t h e D i r e c t o r i s s u p p o r t i n g t h e w i d e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b e f o r e u s , t i s n o t d i f f i c u l t t o e n -

v i s i o n f u t u r e s i t u a t i o n s where t h e D i r e c t o r and an i n t e r v e n o r might d i s a g r e e on some m a t t e r of a c t o r e v i d e n c e of

which h e T r i b u n a l s h o u l d b e p p r i s e d . t i s t h e r e f o r e n o t o n l y l o g i c a l t o g i v e t h e T r i b u n a l t h e u r i s d i c t i o n t o d e c i d e t h e

i s s u e r a t h e r t h a n s i m p l y l e a v i n g i t t o t h e D i r e c t o r t o d e c i d e i n e a c h c a s e , b u t i t i s a l s o f a i r .

2 8 F a i r n e s s i s a e l e v a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n b e c a u s e s . 9(2) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l Ac t x p r e s s l y r e q u i r e s t ha t t h e

p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l b e d e a l t w i t h a s i n f o r m a l l y and a s e x p e d i t i o u s l y a s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s and a i r n e s s

a l l o w . T h i s p o i n t of a i r n e s s a l s o answers h e c o n c e r n r a i s e d by t r a y e r J . t h a t a i d e r r o l e f o r i n t e r v e n o r s w i l l p r o l o n g

and c o m p l i c a t e p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e and t h e r e b y d e l a y d e c i s i o n s of h e T r i b u n a l . B u t , i f a w i d e r r o l e f o r i n t e r v e n o r s

does o t l e a d t o l o n g e r o r more complex p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e t h e T r i b u n a l , u r e l y t h a t i s a e c e s s a r y p r i c e t o pay n t h e

i n t e r e s t s of a i r n e s s , which s e x p r e s s l y r e q u i r e d under . 9 ( 2 ) .

2 9 F i n a l l y , I e f e r t o t h e view of t r a y e r J . t h a t h i s c o n c l u s i o n f o r a narrow i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w as t r e n g t h e n e d w h e n

one looked t o t h e wording of s . 9 7 and 98 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n A c t . Those e c t i o n s , which were found b y t r a y e r J . t o

b e i n a t a t u t e i n p a r i m a t e r i a w i t h t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t , d i s t i n g u i s h e d between making r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s and

c a l l i n g e v i d e n c e ; he o n c l u d e d t h e same i s t i n c t i o n s h o u l d b e made n i n t e r p r e t i n g s . 9(3) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l

A c t .

30 I do o t d i s p u t e h i s f i n d i n g t h e s t a t u t e s i n p a r i m a t e r i a ; however, do o t a c c e p t t h a t t h e c h o i c e of ords n s s .

97 and 98 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t i c t a t e s t h e i r meaning n s . 9(3)of h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t . There a r e s e v e r a l

o t h e r s e c t i o n s i n b o t h s t a t u t e s which u s e t h e words r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " o r "make e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " . S e c t i o n s 6 0 nd 73 of

t h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t l l o w i n t e r v e n t i o n s b y h e A t t o r n e y s G e n e r a l of r o v i n c e s " f o r t h e p u r p o s e of making e p r e s e n -

t a t i o n s " on b e h a l f of r o v i n c e s ; s s . 22(2) and (3) of h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t l l o w s i n t e r e s t e d p e r s o n s " t o make r e p r e -

s e n t a t i o n s " w i t h r e s p e c t t o p r o p o s e d r e g u l a t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o c e r t a in a p p l i c a t i o n s , o r d e r s and p r o c e e d i n g s ; and s . 17 of

t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l Ac t which n v i t e s i n t e r e s t e d p e r s o n s " t o make e p r e s e n t a t i o n s . . . i n w r i t i n g " w i t h r e s p e c t t o

any r u l e s t h a t t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l may make. do n o t t h i n k t h a t i n e a c h s e c t i o n of h e t w o s t a t u t e s t h e u s e of

" r e p r e s e n t a t i o n " must e c e s s a r i l y b e i v e n t h e s ame meaning, s p e c i a l l y where h e c o n t e x t an d p u r p o s e of a r t i c u l a r

s e c t i o n ma y d i c t a t e o t h e r w i s e . S e c t i o n s 9 7 and 98 of h e C o m p e t i t i o n Ac t d e a l w i t h endowing t h e D i r e c t o r w i t h t h e

a u t h o r i t y t o a p p e a r b e f o r e f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l a g e n c i e s o r b o a r d s wh ich r a i s e s d i f f e r e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s from t h o s e

r a i s e d b y . 9(3) f h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t . t maybe, l t h o u g h I r e f r a i n from any o r m a l h o l d i n g on h e m a t t e r ,

t h a t P a r l i a m e n t , ou t of an abundance of a u t i o n , has added t h e " c a l l i n g of v i d e n c e " i n s s . 9 7 and 98 o e n s u r e t h a t

making e p r e s e n t a t i o n s i s n o t i n t e r p r e t e d n a r r o w l y by h e f e d e r a l o r p r o v i n c i a l b o a r d s and a g e n c i e s b e f o r e wh ich t h e

D i r e c t o r i s a p p e a r i n g . I n any e v e n t , I b e l i e v e t h e main t a s k of a Court s i n each c a s e t o a s c e r t a i n t h e meaning of a

s p e c i f i c s e c t i o n b y o o k i n g t o i t s wording and c o n t e x t . T h e a c t t h a t P a r l i a m e n t h a s chosen a o r m u l a t i o n of ords n

a n o t h e r s e c t i o n of a e l a t e d s t a t u t e which a p p e a r s t o convey a p a r t i c u l a r meaning s h o u l d n o t of t s e l f d i s p l a c e con-

v i n c i n g r e a s o n s w h y h e same n t e r p r e t a t i o n s h o u l d n o t a p p l y t o t h e s e c t i o n i n i s s u e b e f o r e t h e C o u r t . T h e p o i n t made

about s . 9 7 and 98 s , a f t e r a l l , a u l e of n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t can b e e b u t t e d , and i n t h i s c a s e h a s b e e n , by more p e r -

s u a s i v e a r g u m e n t s .

31 I n l i g h t of my e a s o n s f o r a l l o w i n g t h e a p pe a l , I do n o t end t n e c e s s a r y t o d e a l w i t h o t h e r arguments of h e

a p p e l l a n t r e l a t i n g t o t h e judgment of t r a y e r J . amounting t o a d e n i a l of a t u r a l j u s t i c e o r a s b e i n g c o n t r a r y t o t h e

O 01 3 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



~aPage 12

1988 CarswellNat 676, 33 Admin. .R .229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada Competition T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R.241 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41 ,23 C.P.R. 3d ) 178, 1989]2 .C . 88 , 9 N.R. 41

Canadian B i l l of i g h t s .

Conclusion

32 Mindful of h e o r d i n a r y d i c t i o n a r y meaning of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " a s d i s c u s s e d above,and of h e r e c o g n i t i o n i n

s . 9(3) t s e l f of n t e r v e n o r s a s p e r s o n s w h o a r e a f f e c t e d b y c o m p e t i t i o n p r o c e e d i n g s , and of h e o v e r a l l purpose and

c o n t e x t of h e Competition Act and r o c e e d i n g s t h e r e u n d e r , conclude h a t t h e meaning of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s " i n s . 9(3)

of h e Competition Tribunal Ac t s not s r e s t r i c t i v e as e c i d e d b y t r a y e r J . I would h e r e f o r e a l l o w t h e a p p e a l and h e

c r o s s- a p p e a l , s e t a s i d e t h e d e c i s i o n of t r a y e r J . , and e f e r t h e m a t t e r back o t h e T r i b u n a l on h e f o l l o w i n g b a s e s :

33 (a) h a t t h e T r i b u n a l i s not p r e c l u d e d , i n e x e r c i s i n g i t s i n h e r e n t d i s c r e t i o n from a l l o w i n g i n t e r v e n o r s t o f u l l y

p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e t , i n c l u d i n g , f t so e t e r m i n e s , h e r i g h t t o d i s c o v e r y , h e c a l l i n g of vidence and

t h e c r o s s -examination of i t n e s s e s ; and

34 ( b ) h a t t h e s p e c i f i c r o l e of h e i n t e r v e n o r s i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g should be e f t t o t h e T r i b u n a l t o d e c i d e , i n t h e

c i r c u m s t a n c e s of h i s c a s e , but n accordance w i t h f a i r n e s s and fundamental u s t i c e and u b j e c t t o t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of

s . 9(3) h a t t h e i n t e r v e n o r s ' e p r e s e n t a t i o n s must be e l e v a n t t o t h i s p r o c e e d i n g i n r e s p e c t of ny m a t t e r a f f e c t i n g t h o s e

i n t e r v e n o r s .

35 T h e only m a t t e r remaining t o be c o n s i d e r e d i s t h e q u e s t i o n of o s t s . N e i t h e r t h e a p p e l l a n t nor any of h o s e

s u p p o r t i n g i t asked f o r c o s t s e i t h e r i n t h e i r memoranda o r o r a l l y a t t h e h e a r i n g of h e a p p e a l . On h e o t h e r hand,

counsel o r t h e r e s p o n d e n t s a p p e a r i n g on h e a p p e a l a s k e d , i n t h e i r memorandum, h a t t h e appeal be d i s m i s s e d w i t h

c o s t s . T h e y i d n o t , however, make any o r a l argument w i t h r e s p e c t t o c o s t s . T h e o s i t i o n t h e n of h e Court s t h a t no

argument, r i t t e n o r o r a l , has been a d d r e s s e d t o i t i n t h i s r e g a r d . However, am f h e view t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n of o s t s

should be d e a l t w i t h .

36 S e c t i o n 13(1) of h e Competition T r i b u n a l Ac t p r o v i d e s t h a t any d e c i s i o n o r o r d e r of h e T r i b u n a l may be

appealed t o t h i s Court "as f t were a udgment of h e F e d e r a l Court —Trial i v i s i o n " . A c c o r d i n g l y , t would seem

t h a t c o s t s should be d i s p o s e d of n an p p e a l from h e T r i b u n a l on a a s i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t employed n a p p e a l s from h e

T r i a l D i v i s i o n . Under new . 344, hich came n t o e f f e c t on Apri12, 1987, t seems l e a r t h a t an award of o s t s i s i n t h e

complete d i s c r e t i o n of h e C o u r t . S u b s e c t i o n ( 3) of . 344 e t s out a number of a t t e r s t h a t t h e Court s e n t i t l e d t o

c o n s i d e r w h e n awarding o s t s . One of h e m a t t e r s enumerated i s t h e r e s u l t of h e p r o c e e d i n g . S i n c e t h e a p p e l l a n t and

t h o s e s u p p o r t i n g i t have been s u c c e s s f u l i n t h i s a p p e a l , I c o n s i d e r t h i s t o be a cogent e a s o n , i n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of

t h i s c a s e , o r awarding o s t s . A e r u s a l of h e v a r i o u s o t h e r m a t t e r s enumerated i n s u b s . 3 ) , w h e n h e y a r e r e l a t e d t o

t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of h i s a p p e a l , do not e r s u a d e me t h e r w i s e .

37 I should add t h a t , were t not o r t h e p r o v i s i o n s of . 13(1) of h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l A c t , t h e C o u r t ' s d i s -

c r e t i o n under R . 344(1) ould have been d i s p l a c e d by h e p r o v i s i o n s of . 1312, which s t h e g e n e r a l r u l e a p p l i c a b l e

t o a p p e a l s from r i b u n a l s o t h e r than t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n . That u l e p r o v i d e s :

No o s t s s h a l l be a y a b l e by any p a r t y t o an a p p e a l under h i s D i v i s i o n t o a n o t h e r u n l e s s t h e C o u r t , i n i t s d i s c r e -

t i o n , o r s p e c i a l r e a s o n s , so o r d e r s .

O 013 Th omson e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 13

1988 CarswellNat 676, 3 Admin. .R .229, sub nom. American A i r l i n e s I n c . v . Canada Competition T r i b u n a l ) ) 89

N.R. 241 , 4 D.L.R. 4th) 41 , 23 C.P.R. 3d) 78, 1989]2 ,C. 88,89 N.R. 41

3 8 If h a t r u l e were t h e r w i s e t o apply e r e , would have had no e s i t a t i o n i n concluding h a t c o s t s should not be

awarded u n l e s s s p e c i a l r e a s o n s t o t h e c o n t r a r y had been s t a b l i s h e d on h e r e c o r d . However, n view of h e words used

i n s . 1 3 , s u p r a , t h i n k r . 344(1) nd o t r . 1312 p p l i e s t o t h i s a p p e a l and e c a u s e , i f h i s were an a p p e a l from t h e T r i a l

D i v i s i o n , I would award c o s t s f o r t h e r e a s o n s e x p r e s s e d e a r l i e r h e r e i n , I would a l l o w t h i s a p p e a l and h e c r o s s - a p p e a l

with c o s t s , i f asked o r .

Appeal and r o s s-appeal l l o w e d , • m a t t e r r e f e r r e d back o t h e C o m p e t i t i o n T r i b u n a l t o be e a l t w i t h on t h e b a s i s t h a t

t h e T r i b u n a l possessed a i s c r e t i o n t o permit a r t i c i p a t i o n t o t h e e x t e n t r e q u e s t e d .

FN Th e D i r e c t o r ' s a p p l i c a t i o n w as u b s e q u e n t l y amended by o r d e r of h e Competition T r i b u n a l t o i n c l u d e a r a y e r

f o r r e l i e f under s . 6 4 ( 1 ) ( e ) ( i i i ) , 77 and 7 7 ( 1 ) ( b ) of h e Competition A c t .

FN2 efore S t r a y e r J . , Wardair a p p a r e n t l y d i d not a s k t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n d i s c o v e r y but wished t o c a l l e v i d e n c e and

c r o s s-examine w i t n e s s e s i n a d d i t i o n t o p r e s e n t i n g argument.

FN3 e c t i o n 8(1) i v e s t h e T r i b u n a l u r i s d i c t i o n t o h e a r a p p l i c a t i o n s under a r t VI I ofthe Competition Ac t and e l a t e d

m a t t e r s and s . 8(3) e a l s w i t h contempt r d e r s of h e T r i b u n a l . S e c t i o n 9(1) t i p u l a t e s t h a t t h e T r i b u n a l i s a Court of

r e c o r d and s h a l l have an o f f i c i a l s e a l which s h a l l be u d i c i a l l y n o t i c e d . S e c t i o n 16 g i v e s r u l e making powe r t o t h e

Tribunal

ENDOFDOCUMENT

O O 2013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works

~





~~Page

1996 C a r s w e l l N a t 667, sub nom. o r b i e ~ ~ e v . Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) ) 199 N.R. , 7

W.D.C.P. 2d) 92

1996 C a r s w e l l N a t 667, sub nom. o r b i e r e v . Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) ) 199 N.R. , 7

W.D.C.P. 2d) 92

Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) v . C o r b i e r e

Her M a j e s t y t h e Q ueen a s r e p r e s e n t e d b y h e M i n i s t e r of n d i a n and N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s Canada and t h e A t t o r n e y

G e n e r a l of anada A p p e l l a n t /Defendant) nd John C o r b i e r e , C h a r l o t t e S y r e t t e , C l a i r e Robinson and Frank Nolan,

e a c h on t h e i r own b e h a l f and on b e h a l f of l l non- r e s i d e n t members of h e Batchewana Band Respondents / l a i n -

t i f f s ) , and Congress of b o r i g i n a l P e o p l e s , and N a t i v e Women's s s o c i a t i o n of anada, nd L e s s e r S l a v e Lake n d i a n

R e g i o n a l C o u n c i l I n t e r v e n o r s )

F e d e r a l Court of Appeal

Hugessen J . A .

Judgment: May 0 , 1996

D o c k e t : A -578-93

O homson R e u t e r s Canada L i m i t e d o r t s L i c e n s o r s e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u r t d o c u m e n t s ) . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

C o u n s e l : John Edmond, o r A p p e l l a n t .

W i l l i a m Henderson, o r Respondents Batchewana n d i a n Band.

Gary E. C o r b i e r e , o r Respondents John C o r b i e r e , C l a i r e Robinson and Frank Nolan.

Martin Henderson, h i l l i p Healey and C a t h e r i n e Twinn, o r I n t e r v e n o r L e s s e r S l a v e Lake I n d i a n R e g i o n a l C o u n c i l .

Lucy McSweeney, o r I n t e r v e n o r N a t i v e Women's A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada.

S u b j e c t : P u b l i c ; C i v i l P r a c t i c e and P r o c e d u r e

N a t i v e law -- - P r a c t i c e and p r o c e d u r e—ppeals




~Page 2

1996 CarswellNat 667, sub nom. Corbiere v . Canada Minister of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) ) 199 N.R. ,7

W.D.C.P. 2d ) 92

Native law—r a c t i c e and procedure—ppeals —Trial udge f i n d i n g t h a t s . 77(1)of n d i a n Ac t i n f r i n g i n g p l a i n -

t i f f s r i g h t s under s . I S of h a r t e r—overnment appealing—ouncil c o n s i d e r i n g i n t e r v e n t i o n i n appeal f o r t w o

y e a r s—a r t i e s p r i n t i n g appeal books and f i l i n g memoranda—ouncil subsequently apply ing f o r i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s

—ounci] e q u e s t i n g o r d e r e n l a r g i n g i s s u e s—ouncil arguing t h a t t h e i r a b o r i g i n a l r i g h t t o ' govern t h e i r r e s e r v e

l a n d s being p u t a t r i s k , and p a r t i e s not a i s i n g r e l e v a n t i s s u e s—p p l i c a t i o n being r a n t e d i n p a r t—ouncil not being

a b l e t o r e - c a s t l i t i g a t i o n between o t h e r s —nlarging i s s u e s or i n t r o d u c i n g f r e s h evidence would cause s e r i o u s

p r e j u d i c e and delay—ouncil being g r a n t e d i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s on terms—ouncil not b eing b l e t o seek o i n t r o d u c e

ne w evidence and having t o f i l e and s e r v e memorandum w i t h i n t h r e e weeks—anadian C h a r t e r of Rights and

Freedoms, . 15—n d i a n Act, R.S.C. 1985, . - 5 , s . 7 7 ( 1 ) .

Th e r i a l judge found t h a t s . 77(1) of h e Indian Ac t i n f r i n g e d t h e r i g h t s of h e p l a i n t i f f s and o t h e r s who were not

r e s i d e n t s of ny of h e b a n d ' s r e s e r v e s under . 15 of h e Canadian Charter of ights and Freedoms.Th e government

appealed. Th e I n d i a n r e g i o n a l c o u n c i l c o n s i d e r e d i n t e r v e n i n g i n t h e appeal f o r t wo y e a r s . Th e appeal books were

p r i n t e d , and t h e p a r t i e s f i l e d t h e i r memoranda. An p p l i c a t i o n f o r a h e a r i n g d a t e was made. Th e I n d i a n r e g i o n a l

c o u n c i l subsequently a p p l i e d t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e a p p e a l . They u r t h e r r e q u e s t e d an order e n l a r g i n g t h e i s s u e s beyond

t h o s e t h a t ha d been pleaded by h e p a r t i e s and d e a l t with b y h e t r i a l judge, rguing h a t t h e i r a b o r i g i n a l r i g h t t o govern

t h e i r r e s e r v e l a n d s had been put a t r i s k or diminished by h e judgment under a p p e a l , and h a t t h e p a r t i e s ha d f a i l e d t o

put . 25 of h e Charter or . 35 of h e C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t , 1982 n i s s u e , as they should have.

Held:

Th e a p p l i c a t i o n w as g r a n t e d i n p a r t .

An n t e r v e n o r i n an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t must take h e case as he or she f i n d s i t , and cannot, o t h e p r e j u d i c e of h e p a r t i e s ,

argue ne w i s s u e s which e q u i r e t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of r e s h evidence.E v e n f h e I n d i a n r e g i o n a l c o u n c i l ' s argument were

c o r r e c t , i t w as not a b l e t o r e - c a s t t h e l i t i g a t i o n between o t h e r s . F u r t h e r , e n l a r g i n g t h e i s s u e s or allowing t h e I n d i a n

r e g i o n a l c o u n c i l t o i n t r o d u c e new evidence would cause s e r i o u s p r e j u d i c e and d e l a y . Th e o u r t owed a duty o a l l t h e

l i t i g a n t s t o b r i n g t h e m a t t e r t o a i m e l y c o n c l u s i o n . Th e n d i a n r e g i o n a l c o u n c i l should be g r a n t e d i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s on

terms t h a t they do not seek t o i n t r o d u c e new evidence, and t h a t they f i l e and s e r v e a memorandum of o i n t s t o be

argued w i t h i n t h r e e weeks.

Cases considered:

I n t e r n a t i o n a lFund or Animal Welfare n c . v . R. 1988), sub nom. n t e r n a t i o n a lFund or Animal Welfare n c . v .

Canada M i n i s t e r of i s h e r i e s & ceans,) 3 N.R. 301, 1988] 3 .C. 590 C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

R..Morgentaler, 1993]

].C.R.46 2

—e f e r r e d t o

Reference re Excise Tax Ac t Canada), sub nom. Reference r e Goods &Servi ces Tax (1992]4W.W.R. 73,2

A l t a . L.R. 3dl 289, 138 N.R. 247, 127 A.R. 161,20 W.A.C. 161, 1992]2 .C.R. 445, sub nom. Reference re

Goods &Services Tax ( A l b e r t a ) ) 94 .L.R. 4th) Sl , sub nom. Reference Re i l l C62) f 992) G.S.T.C.2—r e f e r r e d t o

O 013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o Orig. Govt. Works



~Page 3

1996 C a r s w e l l N a t 667, sub nom. o r b i e r e v . Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) ) 199 N.R. ,7

W.D.C. . 2d) 92

Statutes considered:

Canadian Charter of ights and Freedoms, Part of he Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B of th e C a n a d a

Act 1982 U.K.), 1982, . 1 l

s . 1 5 r e f e r r e d t o


C o n s t i t u t i o n Act, 1982, e i n g Schedule B f h e Canada Act 1982 U.K.), 1982, . 1 1


I n d i a n Act, R.S.C. 1985, . I-5

s . 77(1) r e - e n . R.S.C. 1985, . 32 1 s t S u p p . ) , s . ] 4 ] r e f e r r e d t o

APPLICATION y c o u n c i l f o r i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s .

Hugessen J . A . o r a l l y ) :

1 This i s an a p p l i c a t i o n b y t h e L e s s e r S l a v e Lake I n d i a n Regional Council t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e pending a p p e a l

a g a i n s t a udgment of h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n which found t h a t s u b s e c t i o n 77(1) f h e I n d i a n Ac t FN i n f r i n g e s i n c e r t a i n

r e s p e c t s t h e r i g h t s under s e c t i o n 15 of h e Charter of h e p l a i n t i f f s and c e r t a i n o t h e r s w h o a r e not r e s i d e n t s on any

r e s e r v e of h e Batchewana Band. While am e a d y t o a c c e p t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n on c e r t a i n terms a s i n d i c a t e d below, am

not p r e p a r e d t o accede t o t h e a p p l i c a n t ' s r e q u e s t t h a t s h o u l d e n l a r g e t h e i s s u e s beyond t h o s e t h a t were p l e a d e d i n t h e

Court below and d e a l t w i t h by t h e l e a r n e d T r i a l judge.Nor am p r e p a r e d t o a l l o w t h e a p p l i c a n t s t o l e a d ne w e v i d e n c e .

2 T he r u l e i s c l e a r t h a t an i n t e r v e n o r i n an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t must t a k e t h e c a s e a s she f i n d s i t and c a n n o t , t o t h e

p r e j u d i c e of h e p a r t i e s , a r g u e ne w i s s u e s which r e q u i r e t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of r e s h e v i d e n c e . FN2 T he a p p l i c a n t s s a y ,

however, h a t t h i s c a s e s d i f f e r e n t because h e i r a b o r i g i n a l r i g h t s t o t h e governance of h e i r r e s e r v e l a n d s a r e p u t a t r i s k

o r i n d e e d d i r e c t l y d i m i n i s h e d b y t h e judgment under a p p e a l , and t h a t t h e p a r t i e s , b y a c c i d e n t o r even b y d e s i g n , a i l e d

t o p u t i n i s s u e s e c t i o n 25 of h e Charter FN3 o r s e c t i o n 35 of h e C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t , 1982 FN4 as s h o u l d have been

done. f h a t s i n d e e d t h e c a s e (and I mak e no i n d i n g on t h e p o i n t ) t ma y w e l l p r o v i d e an argument o t h e a p p l i c a n t s

t o u r g e t h a t t h e judgment, f t i s n o t t o b e o v e r t u r n e d e n t i r e l y , s h o u l d be r e s t r i c t e d i n i t s scope. t does n o t , however,

g i v e them w a r r a n t t o e n t i r e l y r e- c a s t t h e l i t i g a t i o n between o t h e r s so as o mak e t t o t h e i r ow n l i k i n g .

3 There s a second r e a s o n which l e a d s me o t h i s c o n c l u s i o n q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t l y of what have s a i d above. T he

judgment a t t r i a l w a s g i v e n i n September 1993. T he a p p l i c a n t s have known about t and have been c o n s i d e r i n g i n -

t e r v e n i n g f o r a t l e a s t two y e a r s . T he Appeal Books have been p r i n t e d and t h e a p p e l l a n t Crown and c r o s s-a p p e l l a n t

Band have i l e d t h e i r memoranda. ther i n t e r v e n o r s have been a l l o w e d i n on terms h a t t h e y n o t seek o i n t r o d u c e ne w




Page 4

] 96 C a r s w e l l N a t 667, sub nom. o r b i e r e v . Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Northern A f f a i r s ) ) 199 N.R. , 7

W.D.C. . 2d) 92

e v i d e n c e . An a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a h e a r i n g d a t e h a s b e e n made u g g e s t i n g d a t e s t h i s month o r n e x t . To l l o w t h e a p p l i c a n t s

what h e y now a s k would c a u s e s e r i o u s p r e j u d i c e and d e l a y . The Order s u s p e n d i n g t h e e f f e c t of h e judgment under

a p p e a l might even have t o be r e c o n s i d e r e d . The a p p l i c a n t s a r e n o t t h e o n l y ones i n t h i s r e c o r d w h o a l l e g e t h a t t h e i r

a b o r i g i n a l r i g h t s a r e a t s t a k e and t h e C o u r t owes t h e same d u t y t oa l l

t h e l i t i g a n t s b e f o r ei t

t o b r i n g t h i s m a t t e r t o at i m e l y c o n c l u s i o n . That would b e d i f f i c u l t o r i m p o s s i b l e i f h e ground r u l e s were now t o be changed i n t h e w ay o u g h t

by h e a p p l i c a n t s .

An Order w i l l go a l l o w i n g t h e a p p l i c a n t s t o i n t e r v e n e h e r e i n on t e r m s t h a t :

I) h e y n o t s e e k t o i n t r o d u c e new e v i d e n c e ; and

2) h e y f i l e and s e r v e a memorandum of o i n t s t o be a r g u e d on o r b e f o r e 31 May 996.

The t y l e of a u s e w i l l be changed a c c o r d i n g l y .

6 A i r e c t i o n w i l l be g i v e n t o t h e j u d i c i a l a d m i n i s t r a t o r t o s e t t h i s a p p e a l down f o r h e a r i n g a t Toronto i n Sep-

tember o r t h e i r s t week of ctober 1 9 9 6 .

7 7 . 1)A ember of band w ho a s a t t a i n e d t h e age of i g h t e e n y e a r s and s o r d i n a r i l y r e s i d e n t on t h e r e s e r v e s

q u a l i f i e d t o v o t e f o r a e r s o n n o m i n a t e d t o be h i e f of h e band a n d , where h e r e s e r v e f o r v o t i n g p u r p o s e s c o n s i s t s

of on e s e c t i o n , t o v o t e f o r p e r s o n s nominated a s c o u n c i l l o r s .

7 7 . ( 1 ) Un membre d une b a n d e , u i a au moins d i x - h u i t ans e t aside o r d i n a i r e m e n t s u r l a r e s e r v e , a u a l i t y pour

v o t e r en f a v e u r dune p e r s o n n e p r e s e n t e e comme a n d i d a t au p o s t e de chef e l a bande e t , l o r s q u e l a r e s e r v e , aux

f i n s d ' ~ l e c t i o n , ne comprend q u ' u n e s e c t i o n e l e c t o r a l e , pour v o t e r en a v e u r de p e r s o n n e l p r e s e n t e e s aux p o s t e s de

c o n s e i l l e r s .

( a ) ny r i g h t s o r freedoms h a t have b e e n r e c o g n i z e d by h e Royal r o c l a m a t i o n of ctober 7, 1763; and

( b ) ny r i g h t s o r freedoms h a t now e x i s t by w a y of a n d c l a i m s a g r e e m e n t s o r ma y be so a c q u i r e d .

( 2) n t h i s A c t , a b o r i g i n a l p e o p l e s of anada" n c l u d e s t h e I n d i a n , n u i t and Metis p e o p l e s of anada.

( 3 ) For g r e a t e r c e r t a i n t y , i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 1) t r e a t y r i g h t s " i n c l u d e s r i g h t s t h a t now e x i s t by w a y of l a n d c l a i m s

a g r e e m e n t s o r ma y be so a c q u i r e d .

( 4) o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any o t h e r p r o v i s i o n of h i s A c t , t h e a b o r i g i n a l and t r e a t y r i g h t s r e f e r r e d t o i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 1) r e

g u a r a n t e e d e q u a l l y t o male and f e m a l e p e r s o n s .

A p p l i c a t i o n g r a n t e d i n p a r t .


~



Page 5

1996 CarswellNat 667, sub nom. o r b i e r e v . Canada M i n i s t e r of n d i a n &Nor the rn A f f a i r s ) ) 199 N.R. , 7

W.D.C.P. 2d) 9 2

FN R . S . C . 1985, . - 5

FN2 ee Reference re E x c i s e Tax A c t , 1992]2 .C.R. 445 a t 48 6-487; R. . Morgentaler, 1993] S.C.R. 462; n -

t e r n a t i o n a l Fund or Animal W e l f a r e I n c . v . Canada, 19881 3 F . C . 59 0 C.A.) t 59 3

FN3 5. The g u a r a n t e e i n t h i s C h a r t e r of e r t a i n r i g h t s and freedoms s h a l l n o t be c o n s t r u e d so a s t o a b r o g a t e o r

d e r o g a t e from any a b o r i g i n a l , t r e a t y of t h e r r i g h t s o r freedoms t h a t p e r t a i n t o t h e a b o r i g i n a l p e o p l e s of Canada i n -

c l u d i n g

FN4 5 . ( 1 ) The e x i s t i n g a b o r i g i n a l and t r e a t y r i g h t s of h e a b o r i g i n a l p e o p l e s of Canada a r e hereby r e c o g n i z e d and

a f f i r m e d .

ENDOFDOCUMENT






Page 1

2003 C a r s w e l l N a t 3504, 003 FCA 08

2003 C a r s w e l l N a t 3504, 003 FCA 08

Ferroequus Railway v . Canadian N a t i o n a l Railway

Ferroequus Railway Company i m i t e d , A p p e l l a n t and Canadian N a t i o n a l Railway C ompany i m i t e d and The Ca-

n a d i a n T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Agency, espondents an d Canadian a c i f i c Railway Company, n t e r v e n e r

F e d e r a l Court of ppeal

Noel . A .

Judgment: October 31,2003

D o c k e t : A-89- 0 3

D homson R e u t e r s Canada L i m i t e d o r t s L i c e n s o r s e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u r C d o c u m e n t s ) . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

C o u n s e l : Margaret . Wiebe w r i t t e n ) , o r Proposed I n t e r v e n e r

Louis . Z i v o t w r i t t e n ) , o r A p p e l l a n t

W . J . Kenny w r i t t e n ) , o r Respondent,Canadian N a t i o n a l Railway C ompany L i m i t e d

M a r c Shannon w r i t t e n ) , o r I n t e r v e n e r , Canadian a c i f i c Railway C ompany

S u b j e c t : C i v i l P r a c t i c e an d r o c e d u r e

C i v i l p r a c t i c e an d p r o c e d u r e --- P r a c t i c e on a p p e a l

Cases o n s i d e r e d b y Noll . A . :

P a r t i e s—dding p a r t i e s—n t e r v e n o r s on a p p e a l

Abbott . R.~20001 2000 a r s w e l l N a t 623 ( s u b n o m A b b o t t v C a n a d a) 200013 F . C . 4 82 ( s u b nom. b b o t t .

C a n a d a ) 186 F . T . R . 269 ( s u b nom. bbott . C a n a d a 188 F . T . R . 198, 2000 C a r s w e l l N a t 3420 Fed. T.D.)—f o l l o w e d

O O 2013 Thomson e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. W o rks



~

Page 2

2003 C a r s w e l l N a t 3504, 2003 FCA 08

Statutes considered:

Canada T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t , S.C. 1996, . 10

G e n e r a l l y—e f e r r e d t o

s . 138—e f e n ~ e d t o

Rules considered by Noll . A . :

Federal Court u l e s , 1998, SOR/98-106

R. 109—o n s i d e r e d

Noel . A . :

1 The Canadian Wheat Board(CWB) e e k s l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e p r e s e n t a p p e a l which i s s e t t o be heard i n

Vancouver on November 25 and 26, 2003. t s e e k s p e r m i s s i o n t o f i l e a memorandum, a d r a f t of which w a s f i l e d

t o g e t h e r with t s l e a v e a p p l i c a t i o n , and p e r m i s s i o n t o make r a l s u b m i s s i o n s a t t h e h e a r i n g .

Background

2 The d e c i s i o n under appeal w a s r e n d e r e d by Canadian T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Agency t h e Agency) on September 10,

2002. Th e Canadian Wheat Board(CWB) a s an i n t e r v e n e r i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g l e a d i n g up t o t h i s d e c i s i o n .

3 Ferroequus Railway Comp any Limited(FE) ought l e a v e t o a p p e a l on October 8, 2002. The CWB as a n

a d d r e s s e e of h e Notice of otion.

4 On ctober 23, 2002, h e CWB e n t a etter t o t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r of h e F e d e r a l Court of Appeal t a t i n g t h a t i t

d i d no t i n t e n d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e Motion o r Leave t o Appeal but e s e r v e d t h e r i g h t t o r e q u e s t l e a v e t o " i n t e r v e n e i n

t h e appeal p r o c e e d i n g s a s i t s i n t e r e s t s may e q u i r e" .

5 On ecember 9, 2002, e a v e t o a p p e a l wa s g r a n t e d and on February 14, 2003, FE e r v e d i t s Notice of Appeal

under cover of etter which w a s copied t o t h e CWB.

6 The Agency, Canadian N a t i o n a l Railway Company(CN) nd Canadian a c i f i c Railway Comp any(CPR) i l e d

t h e i r Notices of Appearance on February 21 ,27 nd 28, 2003, e s p e c t i v e l y .

7 The Appeal Books were a g r e e d t o and s e r v e d on A p r i l 15, 2003. FE i l e d i t s memorandum of a c t and law on

May 4, 2003, and CN, PR nd t h e Agency i l e d t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e memoranda n r e s p o n s e on June 13, 2003.

D 013 Thomson e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 3

2003 C a r s w e l l N a t 3504, 003 FCA 08

8 The e q u i s i t i o n f o r Hearing was i l e d on June 27, 003 and h e h e a r i n g was e t t o be e a r d on November 25 and

26 , 2003, n Vancouver.

9 TheCWB ow e e k s t o i n t e r v e n e . Although h e a f f i d a v i t f i l e d i n s u p p o r t of h e a p p l i c a t i o n a s s e r t s t h a t t h e CWB

always n t e n d e d t o i n t e r v e n e , n o t h i n g i s s t a t e d t o e x p l a i n why h e motion was e f t t o be made a t t h i s l a t e j u n c t u r e .

10 The r a f t m e m o r a n d u m of a c t and law f i l e d b y t h e CWB n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h i t s motion h a s 100 p a r a g r a p h s

an d a i s e s t h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

(a) i d t h e Canadian T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A g e n c y e r r i n law o r u r i s d i c t i o n :

i . when t imposed a u r i s d i c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n i n t h e form of o n d i t i o n s p r e c e d e n t t o i t s e x e r c i s e of t s a u -

t h o r i t y under .138 of h e

CTA,h a t a r e n o t c o n t a i n e d i n t h e s t a t u t e ? a n d / o r

i i . b y e t t e r i n g i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n making t s d e c i s i o n s o l e l y on t h e a l l e g e d f a i l u r e of h e A p p l i c a n t , FE o meet

n on-s t a t u t o r y c o n d i t i o n s p r i o r t o t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a s a whole?

t h o s e c o n d i t i o n s b e i n g t h a t FE ust be a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t :

A . h e r e i s a a t e o r s e r v i c e problem i n t h e r e l e v a n t m a r k e t s ,

B. h e problem s r e l a t e d t o a a c k of d e q u a t e and f f e c t i v e c o m p e t i ti o n o r e x i s t i n g o r p o t e n t i a l market b u s e ;

and

C . h e g r a n t i n g of e g u l a t e d r u n n i n g r i g h t s w i l l e i t h e r e l i m i n a t e o r a l l e v i a t e t h e p r o b l e m .

(c) u r t h e r , o r i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , d i d t h e A g e n c y e r r i n law o r u r i s d i c t i o n by a i l i n g t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t r e l e v a n t

c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n i t s d e t e r m i n a t i o n of h e " p u b l i c i n t e r e s t " a s i t i s r e q u i r e d t o do u n d e r s. 138 of h e CTA, n t h a t

t h e Agen c y a i l e d t o :

g i v e e f f e c t t o t h e s h i p p e r s r i g h t , i n t h i s c a s e t h e CWB, o choose t h e r o u t i n g of t s t r a f f i c , t h e c a r r i e r o r

c o m b i n a t i o n of a r r i e r s t h a t w i l l c a r r y i t s t r a f f i c and t o o b t a i n t h e b e s t p r i c e f o r t h e movement of t s t r a f f i c .

1 1 I n a d d i t i o n t o f i l i n g a m e m o r a n d u m of a c t and l a w , t h e CWB s k s p e r m i s s i o n t o make r a l s u b m i s s i o n s . No

s u g g e s t i o n i s made a s t o t h e time r e q u i r e d .

12 Both CN n d CP ave i l e d e x t e n s i v e s u b m i s s i o n s o p p o s i n g t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n . FE a s i n d i c a t e d i t s c o n s e n t t o

t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n b u t has n o t f i l e d s u b m i s s i o n s i n s u p p o r t of h e a p p l i c a t i o n .




Page 4

2003 C a r s w e l l N a t 3504, 2003 FCA 08

A n a l y s i s a nd D e c i s i o n

13 Rule 109 of h e Federal Court u l e s , 1998, e q u i r e s t h a t a p r o s p e c t i v e i n t e r v e n o r show how t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n

w i l l a s s i s t t h e Court n t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of h e i s s u e s . T h i s a s s i s t a n c e must o t m e r e l y be a e i t e r a t i o n of h e p o s i t i o n

t a k e n by a p a r t y , b u t r a t h e r must p r o v i d e a d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e . What s r e q u i r e d i s a r e l e v a n t and u s e f u l p o i n t of

view which t h e i n i t i a l p a r t i e s c a n n o t o r w i l l n o t p r e s e n t " A b b o t t . R . . [2000] 3 F . C . 4 82 Fed. . D . ) ) .

1 4 T h i s a s s e s s m e n t must be made n c o n t e x t . S p e c i f i c a l l y ,CWB a s t o show t h a t t s p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n a t l e a s t

c o u n t e r b a l a n c e s t h e d i s r u p t i o n which t s late i n t e r v e n t i o n might c a u s e ( A b b o t t v . R . ,supra a t p a r a g r a p h 1 8 ) . I n t h i s

r e s p e c t , n o t e t h a t F E, n i t s r e q u i s i t i o n f o r h e a r i n g r e q u e s t e d t wo days and was n l y a l l o w e d a day and one a l f . The

c a s e s a s s i g n e d f o r Vancouver u r i n g t h e week of o v emb er 24 do o t a l l o w f o r any a d d i t i o n a l t i m e and t i s a p p a r e n t ,

from CWB's r a f t memorandum, h a t t would e q u i r e a s much i m e a s t h e i n t e r v e n e r t o make t s o r a l s u b m i s s i o n s . The

e x i s t i n g p a r t i e s would a l s o have t o f i n d t h e t i m e t o r e s p o n d w i t h i n t h e a l r e a d y r e s t r i c t e d time r a m e .

15 Beyond a s s e r t i n g i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e a s t h e l a r g e s t s h i p p e r of r a i n i n Canada,CWB a s n o t d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t t

would b r i n g t o t h e a p p e a l a n y t h i n g beyond what h a s a l r e a d y been made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e Court by t h e p a r t i e s . Spe-

c i f i c a l l y , t ha s n o t shown ho w t s e x p e r t i s e i n m a r k e t i n g g r a i n i s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e p r o p e r d e t e r m i n a ti o n of h e i s s u e s

p l a c e d b e f o r e t h e Court by h e p a r t i e s .

16 P a r a g r a p h s 39 o 63 of CWB's r a f t memorandum a r e d e d i c a t e d t o t h e s t a n d a r d of e v i e w . CWB's t a t u s a s a

s h i p p e r does n o t p r o v i d e i t w i t h a u n i q u e p e r s p e c t i v e w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s t a n d a r d of e v i e w t o be a p p l i e d .

1 7 I n p a r a g r a p h s 91 t o 100 of t s d r a f t m emo randum , h e CWB i m p l y a s s e r t s i t s agreement w i t h t h e d i s s e n t i n g

o p i n i o n of Mem b e r e n n e t t , a m a t t e r t h a t is f u l l y c a n v a s s e d by FE n i t s own m emo randum .

18 The i s s u e r a i s e d by h e a p p e a l s one of t a t u t o r y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The CWB an c l a i m no a r t i c u l a r e x p e r t i s e i n

t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h e Canada T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c t , S . C . 1996, . 10 t h e CTA). Although t h e CWB an p r o v i d e t h e

p e r s p e c t i v e of r a i n s h i p p e r which a d m i t t e d l y d i f f e r s from t h a t ofFE a a i l w a y company), do n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s

p e r s p e c t i v e i s r e q u i r e d t o f u l l y e x p l o r e t h e i s s u e s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h e CTA s e c t i o n 1 3 8 ) .

19 I n s h o r t , t h e l i m i t e d c o n t r i b u t i o n which t h e CWB r o p o s e s t o m ake s outweighed by h e d i s r u p t i o n which t s

i n t e r v e n t i o n would l i k e l y c a u s e i f t wa s o be a l l o w e d a t t h i s late s t a g e .

20 The a p p l i c a t i o n i s d i s m i s s e d w i t h c o s t s i n f a v o u r of o t h CN nd C P .

ENDOFDOCUMENT




Page 1

1990 a r s w e l l N a t 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 73 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R. 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) , 1991]2 .W . R .

577, 7 Admin. .R. 265, 1991] F . C . 4 16

0

1990 a r s w e l l N a t 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 73 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R. 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) , 1991] . W . R .

577, 7 Admin. .R. 265, 1991) F . C . 4 16

Edmonton r i e n d s of h e North E n v i r o n m e n t a l S o c i e t y v . Canada M i n i s t e r of Western Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n )

R . IN RIGHTOF ALBERTA . EDMONTON R I E N D S OFTHENORTHENVIRONMENTAL OCIETY t a l .

F e d e r a l Court of anada, Appeal i v i s i o n ]

I a c o b u c c i C . J . F . C . , Heald an d S t o n e J J . A .

Heard: September 1 0 , 1990

Judgment: September 28, 1990

D o c k e t : No. A-224-90

O O Thomson e u t e r s Canada L i m i t e d o r t s L i c e n s o r s e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u r t d o c u m e n t s ) . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

P r o c e e d i n g s : r e v e r s e d i n p a r t Edmonton r i e n d s of h e North Environmental o c i e t y v . Canada M i n i s t e r of e s t e r n

Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n ) ( 1 9 9 0 , 990 a r s w e l l N a t 2, 34 . T . R .] 7, 9 D.L.R. 4 t h 143, 4 Admin. L.R. 0$,75

A l t a . L.R. 2d) ( ( F e d . T . D . ) )

C o u n s e l : A. Moen, o r t h e Crown i n Right of l b e r t a .

J . G i l l , o r r e s p o n d e n t s .

P . J . Landry, o r Daishowa Canada Co. t d .

I . H u t t o n , o r M i n i s t e r Western Economic D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , M i n i s t e r of r a n s p o r t , M i n i s t e r of i s h e r i e s and Oceans,

and M i n i s t e r of h e Environment.

S u b j e c t : P u b l i c ; C i v i l P r a c t i c e and P r o c e d u r e

P r a c t i c e - - - P a r t i e s—dding o r s u b s t i t u t i n g p a r t i es—dding a r t y on own motion




gPage 2

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7,73 D.L.R. 4th) 53, 11 4 N.R. 153,38 F.T.R. 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 .W . R .

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C. 416

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e law—ppeals from a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n s—a r t i e s—e d e r a l Court r i a l D i v i s i o n making r d e r

adding p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n as p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t i n a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r j u d i c i a l review under s . 18 of e d e r a l Court Ac t—T r i a l D i v i s i o n imposing c o n d i t i o n s on r o v i n c i a l C r o w n n o r d e r—o n d i t i o n s e f f e c t i v e l y r e d u c i n g p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n

t o r o l e of n t e r v e n e r—r o v i n c i a l C r o w n having d i r e c t economic i n t e r e s t i n outcome of . 18 p r o c e e d i n g s—e d e r a lCourt of Appeal d e l e t i n g c o n d i t i o n s from o r d e r .

C r o w n—roceedings on behalfof r o w n—e d e r a l Court r i a l D i v i s i o n making r d e r adding p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n as

p a r t y respondent i n a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r j u d i c i a l review under s . 18 of F e d e r a l Court Ac t —Trial D i v i s i o n imposing

c o n d i t i o n s on p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n i n o r d e r—o n d i t i o n s e f f e c t i v e l y r e d u c i n g p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n t o r o l e of n t e r v e n e r—P r o v i n c i a l C r o w n having d i r e c t economic i n t e r e s t i n outcome of . 18 p r o c e e d i n g s—e d e r a l Court of Appeal de-

l e t i n g c o n d i t i o n s from o r d e r .

T h e p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n sought t o b e o i n e d a s r e s p o n d e n t s o r i n t e r v e n e r s i n t w o a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r u d i c i a l review made

under s . 18 of h e F e d e r a l Court Act. Both a p p l i c a t i o n s r e l a t e d t o a p u l p m i l l p r o j e c t b e i n g c o n s t r u c t e d b y D. t d .

C e n t r a l t o t h e d i s p u t e w as t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t s e v e r a l f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s , i n making d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e m i l l and

r e l a t e d f a c i l i t i e s , f a i l e d t o comply w i t h t h e Environmental Assessment and Review Process G u i d e l i n e s Order which

p u r p o r t e d l y bound them. T h e F e d e r a l C o u r t , T r i a l D i v i s i o n added t h e p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n and t h e c o n t r a c t o r a s p a r t y

r e s p o n d e n t s , but on t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e y c o u l d not add t o t h e i s s u e s , i l e p l e a d i n g s , c r o s s-examine t h e a p p l i c a n t s '

a f f i a n t s , change t h e t i m e t a b l e or add c o s t s . T h e C r o w n a p p e a l e d . T h e r e s p o n d e n t c r o s s-a p p e a l e d , s u b m i t t i n g t h a t t h e

p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n ought not t o have been o i n e d a t a l l because t h e T r i a l D i v i si o n l a c k e d j u r i s d i c t i o n t o g r a n t r e l i e f

a g a i n s t t h e C r o w n under t h e invoked l e g i s l a t i o n .

Held:

Appeal allowed; o n d i t i o n s removed; r o s s -a p p e a l d i s m i s s e d .

T h e e a l q u e s t i o n w as whether h e o r d e r imposing h e c o n d i t i o n s w as a r o p e r e x e r c i s e of h e broad u d i c i a l d i s c r e t i o n

c o n f e r r e d b y F e d e r a l Court R . 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) . An p p e l l a t e c o u r t could i n t e r f e r e on l i m i t e d grounds, n c l u d i n g a i n d i n g

t h a t t h e o r d e r w as j u s t and r e a s o n a b l e . "

Success of h e s . 18 a p p l i c a t i o n could l e a d t o s e v e r e consequences o r t h e p r o v i n c i a l Crown. t h ad i n v e s t e d money i n

a b r i d g e and r a i l w a y spur being b u i l t i n c i d e n t a l l y t o t h e p u l p m i l l c o n s t r u c t i o n ; h a t money might b e e o p a r d i z e d i f h e

a p p l i c a t i o n were g r a n t e d . T h e f f i c a c y of s s u e d p r o v i n c i a l l i c e n c e s and p e r m i t s might l s o b e put n q u e s t i o n . Yet, h e

p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n would be unable t o adduce e v i d e n c e o r advance arguments as t o t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of h e g u i d e l i n e s

o r d e r , or o d e l v e f u l l y i n t o any s p e c t b e a r i n g on h e e x e r c i s e of h e s . 18 i s c r e t i o n . T h e o n d i t i o n s imposed tended o

reduce t h e p r o v i n c i a l Crown's o l e t o t h a t of n i n t e r v e n e r r a t h e r than a u l l p a r t y . n a d d i t i o n , h e c o n d i t i o n d e p r i v i n gt h e p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n of o s t s c o u l d w e l l a f f e c t t h e manner i n which d i s c r e t i o n w as e x e r c i s e d i n t h e m a t t e r .

F i n a l l y , s i n c e t h e p r o v i n c i a l Crown's i g h t s would be d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d b y h e outcome of h e d i s p u t e , t s h o u l d b e a b l e

t o a s s e r t r i g h t s of p p e a l .

Cases considered:

O 013 T h omson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 3

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 73 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R. 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W. R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 4 16

A.G. . Pontypridd Waterworks C o . ,[1908] C h. 388 Ch. D.)—e f e r r e d t o

Adidas Can.) t d . v . Skoro n t . L t d . , 1971] . C . 382, 12 C . P . R . (2dl b7 C.A.)—p p l i e d

Algonquin M e r c a n t i l e Co rp . . Da r t n d u s t . Can. L t d . ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 5 C . I . P . R . 40, 3 C : P . R . (3d) 14 3 (Fed. C.A.)

r e f e r r e d t o

Amon . Raphael Tuck &Sons t d . , . ~ 1 9 5 b 1 1 Q _ 8 ~ 3 5 7 , _ [ 1 9 5 6 ] 2 .L:F2_372 [ 1 9 5 , 6 ] _ 1 A l l E.R~ 273 Q.B.D.)—c o n s i d e r e d

Ayscough v . B u l l a r (1889), 1 C h. D . 34 1 (C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

Colangelo v . M i s s i s s a u g a ( C i t y ) ; Morencie . Windsor C i t y )(1989), 37 O.A.C. 321, 1 . 0 4 N . R . 298 S . C . C . )—r e f e r r e d t o

D e n e Nation v . R . ,[1983 1 F . C . 146 T.D.)—e f e r r e d t o

Friends of ldman R i v e r S o c . v . Can. Min. o f p t . ) z j 1 9 9 0 1 2 F.C. 1 8 , 76 l t a . L.R. 2d) 89 , 1991] W.W.R.

352,5 . E . L . R .(N.S.) , 68 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 375, 10 8 N . R . 41 l e a v e t o a p p e a l t o S . C . C . g r a n t e d 76 l t a . L.R. 2d)

l v i i ]—p p l i e d

Curtner . C i r c u i t , _ j 1 9 6 8 ~ . _ . Q _ B ~ 5 8 7 , ~ 1 9 6 $ ] , , W_L.R. 688 1 . 9 6 8 ] . _ 1 A l l E R 32 8 C.A.)—o n s i d e r e d

Halton Community C r e d i t Union L t d , v . IC L Computers Can. t d . ~ 1 9 8 5 1 , 3 C . P . C .(2dL Ont. C.A.)—e -

ferred o

I . B . M . Co rp . . Xerox o f an. t d . (1977), 16 N.R. 355 Fed. C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

Performing R i g h t s O r g a n i z a t i o n o f an. t d . v . CBC 1 9 8 6 ) ,7 . P . R . (3d) 33, 6 4 N . R . 330 Fed. C.A.)—e -

ferred o

S t a t u t e s c o n s i d e r e d :

Navigable Waters r o t e c t i o n A c t , R . S . C . 1985, . N-22

R u l e s c o n s i d e r e d :

F e d e r a l Co urt u l e s , C.R. C. 1978, . 6 63

R . 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b )

D 013 T h o m s o n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. W o r k s

t



Page 4

1990 a r s w e l l N a t 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R. 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W . R .

577, 7 Admin. .R. 265, 1991] F.C. 16

Regulations c o n s i d e r e d :

Department o f h e Environment A c t , R . S . C . 1985, . E-10—n v i r o n m e n t a l Assessment and Review P r o c e s s

G u i d e l i n e s O r d e r , SOR/84-467

Appeal from o r d e r o f eed . , 75 A l t a . L.R. 2d) , 4 4 d m i r ~ . . L . R _ 1 0 8 , 6 9 . L , R ~ , 4 t h ~ . 1 4 3 ,34 . T _ R . . 1 3 7 , , a d d i n g

p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n a s p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t , w i t h c o n d i t i o n s a t t a c h e d, i n u d i c i a l r e v i e w p r o c e e d i n g s ; Cross-Appeal b a s e d

o n l a c k o f u r i s d i c t i o n .

The judgment o f h e c ourt wa s d e l i v e r e d by S t o i t e J . A . :

1 This s an a p p e a l from an r d e r made b y h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n o n 1 3 t h March 990 75 l t a . L.R. 2d) ,4 4 Admin.

L.R. 108,6 9 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 143, 34 . T . R . 137jby

whicht h e

a p p e l l a n twas added

a sa

a r t y r e s p o n d e n t i n s . 18 p r o -

c e e d i n g s c ommenc ed by wa y o f an o r i g i - n a t i n g n o t i ce o f motion f i l e d o n 1 6 t h F e b r u a r y 1990. The a p p e l l a n t had

a p p l i e d t o t h a t d i v i s i o n t o be o i n e d i n t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s a s a a r t y r e s p o n d e n t o r , a l t e r n a t i v e l y , as an i n t e r v e n e r .

2 The e l i e f sought n t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s a r e o r d e r s i n t h e n a t u r e o f e r t i o r a r i and mandamus o be d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t

t h e M i n i s t e r o f Western Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , h e M i n i s t e r o f r a n s p o r t , h e M i n i s t e r o f i s h e r i e s and Oceans and

t h e M i n i s t e r o f h e Environment, e s p o n d e n t s i n t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n p r o c e e d i n g s , i n r e s p e c t o f e c i s i o n s made p e r -

t a i n i n g t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n o f a p u l p m i l l and r e l a t e d f a c i l i t i e s o n t h e Peace R i v e r i n n o r t h e r n A l b e r t a .

C e n t r a l t o t h e d i s p u t e i s t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e s e d e c i s i o n s a r e a f f e c t e d by h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l Assessment and Review

P r o c e s s G u i d e l i n e s O r d e r , SOR/84-467 t h e " g u i d e l i n e s o r d e r") hich s s a i d t o be b i n d i n g upon t h e s e m i n i s t e r s and

n o t t o have been complied w i t h .

3 This a p p e a l , o g e t h e r w i t h a p p e a l s from s i m i l a r o r d e r s made o n c u r r e n t l y i n t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n i n c o u r t i l e Nos.

T-441-90 (A-21 1- 9 0 ) , T-441-90 (A-212-90) and T-441-90 (A-225- 9 0 ) , were h e a r d a t t h e same t i m e . The r e a s o n s

g i v e n i n t h i s i l e w i l l a p p l y t o t h e o t h e r i l e s and w i l l be p l a c e d o n h o s e i l e s s o a s t o bec ome h e r e a s o n s o rjudgment

t h e r e i n as w e l l e x c e p t a s m o d i f i e d o r s u p p l e m e n t e d .

The Order

I t w i l l be c o n v e n i e n t i f s e t o u t t h e t e x t o f h e o r d e r which s a t t a c k e d FN

Orde r

Her a j e s t y t h e Queen i n R i g h t o f l b e r t a s t o be h e r e b y added a s a a r t y Respondent n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s upon

t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s :

1 . No l e a d i n g s a d d i t i o n a l t o t h o s e a l r e a d y on t h e r e c o r d m a y b e iled b y hi s R e s p o n d e n t ;




Page 5

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4 t h )653, 114 N.R . 1 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W . R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 416

2. The conduct o f h e R e s p o n d e n t ' s c a s e must i t w i t h i n t h e t i m e frames s e t o u t f o r t h e c o n d u c t of h e c a s e by t h e

p r e s e n t p a r t i e s ;

3. The Respondent ma y a t t e n d o n any c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n s which a r e h e l d o f h e a p p l i c a n t s ' a f f i a n t s b u t i s n o t

e n t i t l e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e t h e r e i n . T h i s r e s t r i c t i o n does n o t a p p l y t o any a f f i d a v i t s f i l e d b y t h e a p p l i c a n t s i n d i r e c t

r e s p o n s e t o any a f f i d a v i t s which t h i s Respondent might f i l e i n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s . To t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e

c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i o n o f ne f f i a n t by m o re h a n o ne o u n s e l might r i s e a s a e s u l t o f h i s o r d e r c o u n s e l a r e d i r e c t e d

t o a v o i d d u p l i c a t i o n and d e l a y b y h e i r d e s i g n a t i n g l e a d c o u n s e l o r o t h e r w i s e d i v i d i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .

4. The e s p o n d e n t s h a l l n o t be n t i t l e d t o c l a i m c o s t s .

A l l o f h e above c o n d i t i o n s , a r e o f o u r s e , s u b j e c t t o any d e c i s i o n which t h e judge h e a r i n g t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n o n t s

m e r i t s might make.

The I s s u e s

5 Two s s u e s a r e r a i s e d i n t h i s a p p e a l which r e q u i r e our a t t e n t i o n . The a p p e l l a n t c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n s i n

q u e s t i o n ought o be t r u c k o u t , and s p e c i a l l y so n view o f h e f a c t t h a t t h e judge ha d l r e a d y d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e c a s e

w a s a r o p e r o ne o r t h e o i n d e r o f h e a p p e l l a n t a s a a r t y r e s p o n d e n t r a t h e r t h a n a s an i n t e r v e n e r . The e s p o n d e n t b y

w a y o f c r o s s - a p p e a l s u b m i t s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ought o t t o have been o i n e d a t a l l b e c a u s e t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n l a c k s

j u r i s d i c t i o n t o g r a n t r e l i e f a g a i n s t t h e a p p e l l a n t . FN2

D i s c u s s i o n

The o n d i t i o n s

6 I s h a l l d e a l i r s t w i t h t h e i s s u e r e l a t i n g t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s . The p p e l l a n t a s s e r t s a d i r e c t i n t e r e s t i n t h e outcome o f

t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a s o wne r o f a r a i l w a y s p u r and b r i d g e a c r o s s t h e Peace R i v e r b e i n g b u i l t i n c i d e n t a l l y t o t h e con-

s t r u c t i o n o f h e p u l p m i l l b y Daishowa Canada C o . t d . As o f 3r d F e b r u a r y 1990 h e s p u r w a s 97 e r c e n t complete

and t h e b r i d g e 26 p e r c e n t . Funding f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h e s p u r w as r e c e i v e d i n t h e amount o f 9 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 from t h e

f e d e r a l Department o f Western Economic D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n . F u r t h e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t a s s e r t s t h a t A l b e r t a a c t u a l l y i s s u e d

p e r m i t s f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h e p u l p m i l l a s w e l l a s an i n t e r i m l i c e n c e f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e w a t e r i n -

t a k e/ e f f l u e n t o u t f a l l f a c i l i t i e s i n t o t h e Peace R i v e r , w i t h a i g h t t o d i v e r t w a t e r from t h a t r i v e r . These a c i l i t i e s were

exempted from t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f h e N a v i g a b l e Waters P r o t e c t i o n A c t , R . S . C . 1985, c . N- 2 2 , b y t h e M i n i s t e r o f

T r a n s p o r t w ho a l s o g r a n t e d an a p p r o v a l t o t h e a p p e l l a n t i n r e s p e c t o f h e b r i d g e p u r s u a n t t o t h e same s t a t u t e . The

a p p e l l a n t , a c c o r d i n g l y , c o n t e n d s t h a t she s h o u l d have been g r a n t e d f u l l r e s p o n d e n t s t a n d i n g , f r e e o f h e c o n d i t i o n s

c o n t a i n e d i n t h e o r d e r . As she p u t s i t i n p a r a .6 f e r mem o r and um:

6. l b e r t a h a s an immediate i n t e r e s t i n t h e outcome o f h e c u r r e n t p r o c e e d i n g s f l o w i n g from t s o w n e r s h i p o f h e

Bridge and t h e s p u r . F u r t h e r m o r e , A l b e r t a o w n s n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s g e n e r a l l y i n t h e P r o v i n c e o f l b e r t a and ha s

e x c l u s i v e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l u r i s d i c t i o n t o d e a l w i t h h e r n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a s s h e s e e s i t , i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t t o i s s u e

O 013 Thom s on R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



~

~

Page 6

1990 CarswellNat ,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R. 153,38 . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W . R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 4 16

p e r m i t s , l i c e n s e s and o g e n e r a l l y manage h e s e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s .

The c o n d i t i o n s imposed, he s u b m i t s , would hamper h e r a b i l i t y t o adduce e v i d e n c e , o c r o s s -examine any w i t n e s s e s

a d v e r s e i n i n t e r e s t and o make u b m i s s i o n s .

7 The l e a r n e d judge below gave t h e f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n s f o r imposing t h e impugned c o n d i t i o n s ( a p p e a l book, p .

I n t h i s c a s e , I have c o m e o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e c o u r s e of c t i o n i s t o add A l b e r t a and Daishowa s

p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t s b u t w i t h v e r y s t r i c t c o n d i t i o n s a t t a c h e d t o t h e r o l e s t h e y ma y l a y . T h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s b a s e d o n

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o n l y r e a s o n t o add them a s r e s p o n d e n t s , i n s t e a d of s i n t e r v e n e r s , s t o a c c o r d them a p p e a l r i g h t s .

I t i s based on a o n s c i o u s n e s s of h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t t h e i n i t i a t i n g p a r t y i n a l e g a l p r o c e e d i n g s h o u l d n o r m a l l y be

a b l e t o choose w ho s added a s a p a r t y and o c o n t r o l t h e g e n e r a l s t r u c t u r e of h e c a s e . I t i s b a s e d v e r y h e a v i l y on

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e arguments on h e a p p l i c a t i o n w i l l be a r g e l y l e g a l i n n a t u r e ( t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h e

E.A.R.P. u i d e l i n e s and t h e r e s p e c t i v e p i e c e s of e d e r a l l e g i s l a t u r e ) a s w e l l a s on h e f a c t t h a t a l l of h e r e l e v a n t

e v i d e n c e s h o u l d be n t h e c o n t r o l and h e knowledge of h e p r e s e n t r e s p o n d e n t s .

Rule 1716 o n t e m p l a t e s t h a t such terms and o n d i t i o n s m a y b e imposed, when a r t i e s a r e added, f t i s j u s t t o do

s o . I n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e I t h i n k t h e f o l l o w i n g t e r m s f i t w i t h i n t h a t c a t e g o r y . While A l b e r t a and Daishowa s h o u l d

have h e r i g h t t o c a l l e v i d e n c e i . e . , t o i l e a f f i d a v i t e v i d e n c e )and o c r o s s -examine f f i a n t s of ny f f i d a v i t s f i l e d

i n r e p l y t h e r e t o , I do o t t h i n k t h e y s h o u l d be b l e t o add o t h e i s s u e s which h e a p p l i c a n t s have s t a b l i s h e d a s t h e

framework of h e i r c a s e . They w i l l n o t be g i v e n any i g h t t o f i l e p l e a d i n g s , b u t must a k e t h e p l e a d i n g s a s t h e y

p r e s e n t l y e x i s t . With r e s p e c t t o t h e c r o s s-e x a m i n a t i o n of h e a p p l i c a n t s ' a f f i a n t s , t h e y w i l l be e n t i t l e d t o a t t e n d a s

o b s e r v e r s t h e r e o n b u t n o t t o p a r t i c i p a t e t h e r e i n . The d d i t i o n of l b e r t a and Daishowa s r e s p o n d e n t s s h o u l d n o t

be a l l o w e d t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h o r d e l a y t h e t i m e t a b l e which h e a p p l i c a n t s and h e p r e s e n t r e s p o n d e n t s e i t h e r a g r e e

upon r which h e a p p l i c a n t s c o n v i n c e t h e c o u r t t o impose. n t h i s r e g a r d , h e o r d e r a d d i n g A l b e r t a and Daishowa

a s r e s p o n d e n t s w i l l be on h e e x p r e s s c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e y i t t h e m s e l v e s w i t h i n t h a t t i m e t a b l e . I n a d d i t i o n , I do o t

b e l i e v e t h a t e i t h e r s h o u l d be a b l e t o c l a i m c o s t s . O r d e r s w i l l i s s u e i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e s e r e a s o n s .

8 The l e a r n e d judge below r e l i e d o n R . 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) FN3 by w a y of n a l o g y . She w as of h e view t h a t t h e a p -

p e l l a n t ' s p r e s e n c e b e f o r e t h e c o u r t w as n o t " n e c e s s a r y , " and no a t t a c k i s made on t h a t c o n c l u s i o n . The ground upon

which she seems o have d e c i d e d t o o i n t h e a p p e l l a n t a s a a r t y r e s p o n d e n t w as h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t "ought o have been

j o i n e d , " though s h e a l s o t h o u g h t h e o i n d e r s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d b e c a u s e s h e b e l i e v e d t h e a p p e l l a n t wished t o a c q u i r e

r i g h t s of p p e a l " a p p e a l book, . 31 ) p p .6- 7 ] .

9Rule 1 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) s n o t p e c u l i a r t o p r a c t i c e and p r o c e d u r e i n t h e F e d e r a l C o u r t . t , o r a a r i a t i o n of t , h a s been a

f e a t u r e of h e r u l e s g o v e r n i n g p r a c t i c e and p r o c e d u r e i n t h e Supreme Court of n t a r i o s i n c e a t l e a s t 1913. t w as

a p p a r e n t l y i n h e r i t e d from England. t i s n o t a u l e f o r o i n i n g an i n t e r v e n e r b u t f o r o i n i n g a p a r t y . There s , of o u r s e ,

a i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p o s i t i o n of an i n t e r v e n e r i n p r o c e e d i n g s and t h a t of a p a r t y . The n t e r v e n e r , f o r

example, must s a u l e t a k e t h e r e c o r d a s he i n d s t . He a s no t a t u s t o p u r s u e an p p e a l : T o r o n t o ( C i t y ) . Morencie,

S.C.C. N o . 21207, udgment e n d e r e d 1 7 t h A p r i l 1989 r e p o r t e d Colangelo v . M i s s i s s a u g a ( C i t y ) ; Morencie v . Win-

d s o r C i t y ) , 37 .A.C. 21 , 104 N . R . 9 8 ] . On h e o t h e r hand, a r t y o i n e d b y r d e r of o u r t w i l l n o r m a l l y e n j o y t h e

D 013 Thom son R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 7

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7,73 D.L.R. 4th) 53, 114 N.R. 153,38 .T.R. 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 .W . R .

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C. 416

s ame i g h t s as h o s e of t h e r p a r t i e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t t o adduce e v i d e n c e and o make u b m i s s i o n s . t has been a i d ,

i n d e e d , h a t h e h o l d s an a b s o l u t e r i g h t t o c r o s s-examine w i t n e s s e s a d v e r s e i n i n t e r e s t : s e e HuCton C o n z m z ~ ~ ~ i i y C f • e d i t

U r t i o ~ a L t c l v . IC L o m p ~ ~ t e r s Can. Ltd 1985),3 .P.C. 2d) 52 t 253 Ont. . A . ) .

10 T h e r e a l q u e s t i o n a t t h i s s t a g e i s whether t h e judge below, n imposing t h e c o n d i t i o n s i n q u e s t i o n , a c t e d

p r o p e r l y w i t h i n t h e d i s c r e t i o n v e s t e d i n h e r b y R. 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) . T hat i s c r e t i o n i s undoubtedly broad—on such terms

as t t h i n k s j u s t " —but t i s not an a b s o l u t e power o be e x e r c i s e d w i t h f u l l and complete d i s c r e t i o n . Such a broad

d i s c r e t i o n i s s u b j e c t t o t h e c o n s t r a i n t of e i n g e x e r c i s e d upon r e a s o n a b l e g r o u n d s : s e e , e . g . , Per o r r n i n Ri h t s O f ~ -

~ a n i ~ u t i o n of an. t d . v . Cl3C 1986) 7 .P.R.(3dL 4 .R. 330 t 33 9 , F e d . . C.A., e r Heald J . A . Although h i s

c o u r t must be slow t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e e x e r c i s e of d i s c r e t i o n such a s t h i s , t may do so on c e r t a i n l i m i t e d grounds,

i n c l u d i n g i f we hould f i n d t h a t t h e o r d e r i s not j u s t and r e a s o n a b l e" : s e e , e . g . , I . B . M . C ~ j ~ . v . Xerox v Can. L t d .

1977 16 . I Z . 35 5 Fed. C.A. ;Algonquin M e r c a n t i l e Corp. . D a r t l n d u s t . Can. t d .(1984,5 . I . P . R . 40,3 C.P.R.

3d 143 Fed. . A . ) .

11 T h e s . 18 a p p l i c a t i o n i s , a s I have s a i d , brought a g a i n s t s e v e r a l f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s . I f t s u c c e e d s , t h e c o n s e -

quences o r t h e a p p e l l a n t could w e l l be q u i t e s e v e r e . Money h e a p p e l l a n t has n v e s t e d i n t h e b r i d g e and a i l w a y spur

might be put i n jeopardy i f t h e m i l l i s u n a b l e t o o p e r a t e o r i t s o p e r a t i o n i s d e l a y e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on account of h e

f a i l u r e of h e f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s t o comply w i t h t h e g u i d e l i n e s o r d e r , assuming t h a t o r d e r i s found t o be b i n d i n g upon

them. T h e f f i c a c y of ny p e r m i t s and l i c e n c e s i s s u e d under r o v i n c i a l law o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of h e m i l l as w e l l a s f o r

t h e i n t a k e/ o u t f a l l f a c i l i t i e s on h e b a s i s of a e d e r a l exemption g r a n t e d t o t h e m i l l owner Daishowa Canada C o. t d .

p u r s u a n t t o t h e Navigable Waters P r o t e c t i o n Act, might be put n q u e s t i o n . Yet, h e a p p e l l a n t w i l l not be a b l e t o a d -

duce h e r own vidence and advance h e r own rguments t h a t t h e g u i d e l i n e s o r d e r i s i n a p p l i c a b l e because a f e d -

e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l agreement u r p o r t s t o l e a v e e n v i r o n m e n t a l assessment of h e p r o j e c t i n t h e hands of h e p r o v i n c e . Sh e

w i l l be r e v e n t e d , l s o , from d e l v i n g f u l l y i n t o any s p e c t of h e m a t t e r which may e a r upon h e e x e r c i s e of i s c r e t i o n

v e s t e d i n t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n under . 1 8 .

12 T h e r d e r below s som e wha t of y b r i d , a r t a k i n g of e a t u r e s b o t h of n r d e r o i n i n g a a r t y s i m p l i c i t e r and,

w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n of h e c o n d i t i o n s , of an o r d e r g r a n t i n g i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s . I am ot a t a l l c e r t a i n t h a t t h e judge w as

c o r r e c t i n adding h o s e c o n d i t i o n s . FN4j

13 We ave not h ad drawn t o ou r a t t e n t i o n any c a s e i n which a c o u r t , having d e c i d e d t o j o i n a p a r t y b e f o r e a

m a t t e r w as e a r d , q u a l i f i e d t h e r o l e of h e new a r t y i n such fundamental ways s t h o s e found n t h e c o n d i t i o n s . Those

c o n d i t i o n s go a long way, n my p i n i o n , towards e d u c i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r o l e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s t o more i k e t h a t of

an i n t e r v e n e r than of a f u l l p a r t y . T h e y l i m i t t h e a p p e l l a n t i n t h e e v i d e n c e she may wish t o adduce, i n

c r o s s -examination and n t h e p o s i t i o n she ma y wish o a d o p t . T h e y e q u i r e t h e a p p e l l a n t , n e f f e c t , o t a k e t h e r e c o r d a s

sh e f i n d s i t and t o conform t o a " t i m e t a b l e " f o r t h e h e a r i n g of h e s . 18 a p p l i c a t i o n r e g a r d l e s s of h e impact t h a t

t i m e t a b l e may ave on h e a b i l i t y of h e a p p e l l a n t t o advance e r own o s i t i o n . FNS

14 T h e r d e r below a l s o d e p r i v e s t h e a p p e l l a n t of o s t s i n t h e s . 18 r o c e e d i n g s even though h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n i s

l e f t t o t h e judge h e a r i n g t h a t a p p l i c a t i o n . I n my ie w such a c o n d i t i o n c o u l d w e l l a f f e c t t h e w ay n which t h a t judge

e x e r c i s e s t h e d i s c r e t i o n i n t h e m a t t e r . t would have been b e t t e r t o say o t h i n g about o s t s and e a v e t h e m a t t e r e n t i r e l y

i n t h e hands of h a t judge, o b e e x e r c i s e d i n t h e w a y he o r she may e e l most a p p r o p r i a t e having r e g a r d t o t h e c i r -

D 013 T h o m s o n e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



~Page 8

1990 CarswellNat ,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7,73 D.L.R. 4 t h )653, 114 N.R. 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) ,[1991]2 .W . R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 4 16

cumstances p r e v a i l i n g a t t h e t i m e t h e d i s c r e t i o n i s t o be e x e r c i s e d . That udge s i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o make h e d e -

c i s i o n u n a f f e c t e d b y h e views of h e l e a r n e d m o t i o n s judge formed a t t h e p r e l i m i n a r y s t a g e .

15 I n s u m m a r y h e o r d e r , i n my i e w , i s n o t " j u s t and r e a s o n a b l e " b e c a u s e of h e c o n d i t i o n s i t i m p o s e s . I wouldd e l e t e t h o s e c o n d i t i o n s .

J u r i s d i c t i o n

16 I t now becomes n e c e s s a r y t o a d d r e s s t h e s u b m i s s i o n of h e r e s p o n d e n t s i n t h e i r c r o s s-a p p e a l t h a t t h e judge

below ought o t t o have o i n e d t h e a p p e l l a n t b e c a u s e no l a i m f o r r e l i e f s made g a i n s t h e r , and l s o b e c a u s e t h e T r i a l

D i v i s i o n would l a c k j u r i s d i c t i o n t o g r a n t r e l i e f t o t h e a p p e l l a n t u n d e r t h e i n v o k e d l e g i s l a t i o n : D ene N a t i o n v . R . ,

X 1 9 8 3 ] _ 1 F.C. 146 T . D . ) . T h e o u r t s have sometimes o i n e d a a r t y d e f e n d a n t even though no e l i e f would be o u g h t

a g a i n s t him (Gurtner v . C i r c u i t , 1968] ~ . T B ~ ~ 8 7 , , . j 1 9 6 8 ~ 2 W.L.R. 688, 1 9 6 8 , _ 1 A l l G.R. 32 8 C . A . ) ) , and have

r e c o g n i z e d a l s o t h a t t h e p a r t y j o i n e d would be e n a b l e d t o r e s i s t t h e r e l i e f s o u g h t and be h e a r d on t h e terms of any

judgment: compare n z ~ r ~ _ v . . Raphael u c k _ c 4 r Sans t d _ . , . j 1 9 5 C ] 1 Q;B 3 5 7 _ a t 3 8 3 , . . . L 1 9 5 G 1 2 W l L . R . _ 3 7 2 , ~ ; 1 9 5 6 1 . _ 1 _ A l l

E,R. 273 Q : B _ D , ~ . M u c h w i l l depend upon h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of h e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e . T h i s c o u r t h a s been w i l l i n g t o o i n

a a r t y i n p r o c e e d i n g s such a s t h e s e s i m p l y b e c a u s e , a s t h a t p a r t y ' s r i g h t s w i l l be d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by h e outcome of

t h e d i s p u t e , he h o u l d be e n a b l e d t o a s s e r t r i g h t s of p p e a l : Adidas Can.) t d . v . Skoro n t . L t d . 197 _F_C. 382, 12

C_P,R. ~2d~67 C . A . ) ; F r i e n d s of ldman R i v e r S o c . v . Can. M i r ? _ o T . 1990 2 . C . 1 8 , 76 l t a . L _ R , _ ( 2 d ) 289,

L 1 9 9 1 ] _ l W~W.R:.352L5„ C . E : L . R . ~ N . S , ~ l . , , _ 6 8 D . ;L: .~h~ 7 5 , . . _ 1 . 0 8 N :_241 ~ C A . ~ . T h e r i n c i p l e e n u n c i a t e d by h i s

c o u r t i n Adidas woul d a p p e a r t o a p p l y w i t h even g r e a t e r f o r c e w h e r e , a s h e r e , t h e s . 18 p p l i c a t i o n i s s t i l l pending i n

t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n .

D i s p o s i t i o n

17 I s h o u l d add one f i n a l wo rd b e f o r e d i s p o s i n g of h i s a p p e a l . T h e r e s p o n d e n t s f e a r t h a t t h e p r e s e n c e of h e

a p p e l l a n t a s a u l l p a r t y w i l l e n l a r g e and d e l a y t h e s . 18 p r o c e e d i n g s and w i l l add t o t h e c o s t s . I a g r e e t h a t a l l t h e s e

t h i n g s a r e p o s s i b l e , b u t , s u r e l y , t h e s e a r e b u t c o n s e q u e n c e s which may n o r m a l l y flow from any l e g a l p r o c e e d i n g s i n

which a h i r d p a r t y ' s r i g h t s w i l l be i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by h e outcome. T h e o u r t h a s power o c o n t r o l i t s o w n r o c e s s i n

o r d e r t o e n s u r e t h a t u s t i c e i s done and, o t h a t end, t may n a p p r o p r i a t e c i r c u m s t a n c e s d e a l w i t h any b v i o u s a b u s e of

i t s p r o c e s s i n a v a r i e t y of ays n c l u d i n g by h e l e v y i n g of o s t s . No uch a b u s e i s e v i d e n t on h e r e c o r d b e f o r e u s .

18 I n t h e r e s u l t I would a l l o w t h e a p p e a l w i t h c o s t s and would amend h e o r d e r made 1 3 t h March 1990 by e l e t i n g

t h e r e f r o m a l l of h e words commencing w i t h t h e words "upon h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s : ” s o h a t t h e o r d e r a s amended

w i l l r e a d :

Her Majesty h e Queen n Right of l b e r t a i s t o be h e r e b y added a s a p a r t y Respondent n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s .

T h e t y l e of a u s e i n t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n s h a l l be amended o r e f l e c t t h e a d d i n g of er M a j e s t y t h e Queen n R i g h t of

A l b e r t a a s a a r t y Respondent.

O 013 Thom son R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page9

1990 C a r s w e l l N a t 4, 8 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 53, 114 N.R. 153,38 . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W. R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 4 16

19 The r o s s -a p p e a l i s d i s m i s s e d .

(b) r d e r any p e r s o n who ought t o have been o i n e d a s a p a r t y o r whose p r e s e n c e b e f o r e th e Court i s n e c e s s a r y t o

e n s u r e t h a tl l

m a t t e r s i n d i s p u t e i n t h e a c t i o n m a yb e f f e c t u a l l y and c o m p l e t e l y d e t e r m i n e d and a d j u d i c a t e d upon, obe added a s a p a r t y .

Appeal l l o w e d , • c r o s s-appeal i s m i s s e d .

FN . S i m i l a r l y , t h e o r d e r i n c o u r t f i l e No. A-225-90 wa s made i n f a v o u r of h e a p p e l l a n t , w h i l e i n c o u r t f i l e Nos.

A-211-90 and A-212-90 h e o r d e r s were made n f a v o u r of aishowa Canada Co. t d . , t h e a p p e l l a n t t h e r e i n .

FN2No r o s s -a p p e a l wa s a u n c h e d i n t h e o t h e r m a t t e r s now p e n d i n g b e f o r e u s .

FN3 2) At any s t a g e of an a c t i o n t h e Court may, on such t e r m s a s i t t h i n k s j u s t an d e i t h e r of t s own motion o r on

a p p l i c a t i o n ,

FN4 do n o t t h i n k i t d e s i r a b l e t o l a y down a g e n e r a l r u l e f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of h e words of i s c r e t i o n i n R .

1 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) . While t h e r u l e g i v e s no g u i d a n c e a s t o t h e wa y h e d i s c r e t i o n s h o u l d be e x e r c i s e d , t p e r m i t s a u d g e , a t a

minimum, o r e q u i r e an p p l i c a n t t o pay h e c o s t s of h e i n t e r l o c u t o r y a p p l i c a t i o n s e e , . g . , . Z s c o u ~ h v . B u l l a r l889,

41 C h. D . 41 C.A. ; A.G. . P o n t y p r i d d W a t e r° w o r k s C o . t 1908 1 Ch. 388 C h. . ) ) , though t i s b r o a d e r t h a n t h a t .

Such an o r d e r a s t o c o s t s would o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e o r d i n a r y r i g h t s t h e p e r s o n o i n e d may x e r c i s e a s a p a r t y i n t h e

u n d e r l y i n g p r o c e e d i n g s .

FN5 t h e h e a r i n g we were o l d t h a t t h e s . 18 p p l i c a t i o n i s now c h e d u l e d t o be e a r d i n e a r l y 1991.The g r e e d upon

" t i m e t a b l e " seems h u s t o have been v e r t a k e n by e v e n t s i n t h a t t wa s p p a r e n t l y drawn w i t h a view t o a a t e i n J u l y

1990 when h e p l a n t wa s x p e c t e d t o commence p e r a t i o n s , which t d i d .

ENDOFDOCUMENT


~~



~•~



Page 1

1990 CarswellNat4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7,73 D.L.R. 4 t 1 1 ) 653, 114 N.R. 153, 38 F . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) , [1991]2 .W . R .

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C. 4 16

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4th) 53, 114 N.R. 153,38 F.T.R.24 0 n o t e ) , [1991]2 .W . R .

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C. 16

Edmonton F r i e n d s of h e North Environmental S o c i e t y v . Canada M i n i s t e r of Western Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n )

R . IN RIGHTOFALBERTA . EDMONTONFRIENDSOF THENORTHENVIRONMENTALSOCIETY t a l .

F e d e r a l Court of anada, Appeal i v i s i o n ]

I a c o b u c c i C . J . F . C . , Heald and Stone J J . A .

Heard: Septembe r 1 0 , 1990

Judgment: September 28, 1990

Docket: No . A-224-90

D homson Reuters Canada Limited o r i t s L i c e n s o r s e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u r t documents). l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

P r o c e e d i n g s : r e v e r s e d i n p a r t Edmonton Friends of h e North Environmental o c i e t y v . Canada M i n i s t e r of Western

Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n ) _ ~ 1 9 9 0 ) ) , 1990 CarswellNat 2, 34 . T . R . 1 . 3 7 , 69 D.L.R. 4th) 143, 4 Admin. L.R.]8, 75

A l t a . L.R.(2d~ (Fed. .D.))

Counsel: A. Moen, o r t h e C rown i n R i g l l t of l b e r t a .

J . G i l l , f o r r e s p o n d e n t s .

P . J . Landry, o r Daishowa Canada Co. t d .

I . Hutton, o r M i n i s t e r Western Economic D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , M i n i s t e r of r a n s p o r t , M i n i s t e r of i s h e r i e s and Oceans,

and M i n i s t e r of h e Environment.

S u b j e c t : P u b l i c ; C i v i l P r a c t i c e and Procedure

P r a c t i c e -- - P a r t i e s—dding or s u b s t i t u t i n g p a r t i e s—dding p a r t y on own otion

O 013 Thomson R e u t e r s .No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



q3Page 2

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7,73 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R. 1 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W. R .

577, 7 Admin. .R. 265, 1991] F.C. 416

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e law—ppeals from d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n s—a r t i e s—e d e r a l Court r i a l D i v i s i o n making r d e r

adding p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n a s p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t i n a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w u n d e r s . 18 of e d e r a l Court Act—T r i a l D i v i s i o n imposing o n d i t i o n s on r o v i n c i a l C r o w n n o r d e r—o n d i t i o n s e f f e c t i v e l y r e d u c i n g p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n

t o r o l e of n t e r v e n e r—r o v i n c i a l C r o w n h a v i n g d i r e c t economic n t e r e s t i n outcome of . 18 p r o c e e d i n g s—e d e r a l

Court of Appeal e l e t i n g c o n d i t i o n s from o r d e r .

C r o w n—r o c e e d i n g s on b e h a l f of r o w n—e d e r a l Court r i a l D i v i s i o n making r d e r a d d i n g p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n s

p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t i n a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w u n d e r s . 18 of e d e r a l Court Ac t —Trial D i v i s i o n imposing

c o n d i t i o n s on r o v i n c i a l C r o w n n o r d e r—o n d i t i o n s e f f e c t i v e l y r e d u c i n g p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n o r o l e of n t e r v e n e r—P r o v i n c i a l C r o w n having d i r e c t economic i n t e r e s t i n outcome of . 18 p r o c e e d i n g s—e d e r a l Court of Appeal d e -

l e t i n g c o n d i t i o n s from o r d e r .

Th e r o v i n c i a l C r o w n s o u g h t t o be o i n e d a s r e s p o n d e n t s o r i n t e r v e n e r s i n t w o a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w made

under s . 18 of h e F e d e r a l Court A c t . Both a p p l i c a t i o n s r e l a t e d t o a p u l p m i l l p r o j e c t b e i n g c o n s t r u c t e d by D . t d .

C e n t r a l t o t h e d i s p u t e w as t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t s e v e r a l f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s , i n making d e c i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e m i l l and

r e l a t e d f a c i l i t i e s , f a i l e d t o comply w i t h t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l Assessment and Review P r o c e s s G u i d e l i n e s Order which

p u r p o r t e d l y bound them. Th e F e d e r a l C o u r t , T r i a l D i v i s i o n added t h e p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n and t h e c o n t r a c t o r a s p a r t y

r e s p o n d e n t s , b u t on t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e y c o u l d n o t add t o t h e i s s u e s , i l e p l e a d i n g s , c r o s s-examine t h e a p p l i c a n t s '

a f f i a n t s , change h e t i m e t a b l e o r add c o s t s . T h e C r o w n a p p e a l e d . Th e e s p o n d e n t c r o s s-a p p e a l e d , s u b m i t t i n g t h a t t h e

p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n ought n o t t o have been o i n e d a t a l l b e c a u s e t h e T r i a l D i v i si o n l a c k e d j u r i s d i c t i o n t o g r a n t r e l i e f

a g a i n s t t h e C r o w n under h e invoked l e g i s l a t i o n .

Held:

Appeal a l l o w e d ; c o n d i t i o n s removed; r o s s-a p p e a l d i s m i s s e d .

Th e e a l q u e s t i o n w as whether h e o r d e r imposing h e c o n d i t i o n s w as a r o p e r e x e r c i s e of h e b r o a d u d i c i a l d i s c r e t i o n

c o n f e r r e d by F e d e r a l Court R . 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) . An p p e l l a t e c o u r t c o u l d i n t e r f e r e on i m i t e d g r o u n d s , i n c l u d i n g a i n d i n g

t h a t t h e o r d e r w a s j u s t and r e a s o n a b l e . "

Success of h e s . 18 p p l i c a t i o n c o u l d l e a d t o s e v e r e c o n s e q u e n c e s f o r t h e p r o v i n c i a l C ro wn. t h ad n v e s t e d money n

abridge and r a i l w a y s p u r b e i n g b u i l t i n c i d e n t a l l y t o t h e p u l p m i l l c o n s t r u c t i o n ; h a t money might be e o p a r d i z e d i f h e

a p p l i c a t i o n were r a n t e d . Th e f f i c a c y of s s u e d p r o v i n c i a l l i c e n c e s and e r m i t s might l s o be u t i n q u e s t i o n . Y e t , h e

p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n would be u n a b l e t o adduce e v i d e n c e o r advance arguments a s t o t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of h e g u i d e l i n e s

o r d e r , r t o d e l v e f u l l y i n t o any s p e c t b e a r i n g on h e e x e r c i s e of h e s . 18 i s c r e t i o n . Th e o n d i t i o n s imposed e n d e d t o

r e d u c e t h e p r o v i n c i a l Crown's o l e t o t h a t of n n t e r v e n e r r a t h e r t h a n a u l l p a r t y . I n a d d i t i o n , h e c o n d i t i o n d e p r i v i n g

t h e p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n of o s t s c o u l d w e l l a f f e c t t h e manner n which d i s c r e t i o n w as x e r c i s e d i n t h e m a t t e r .

F i n a l l y , s i n c e t h e p r o v i n c i a l Crown's i g h t s would be d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d b y h e outcome of h e d i s p u t e , t s h o u l d be b l e

t o a s s e r t r i g h t s of p p e a l .

Cases o n s i d e r e d :

O 013 Thomso n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 3

1990 a r s w e l l N a t 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 73 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N.R . 1 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 24 0 n o t e ) ,[ 9 9 1] . W . R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 4 16

A.G. . Pontypridd Waterworks C o . , 1908] Ch. 388 Ch. D. )—e f e r r e d t o

Adidas Can.) t d , v . Skoro n t . L t d . ,[1971] . C . 382, 12 C . P . R . 2d) 7 C.A.)—p p l i e d

Algonquin M e r c a n t i l e Corp. . D a r t n d u s t . Can. L t d . ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 5 C . I . P . R . 40, 3 C . P . R . (3d) 14 3 (Fed. C.A.)—r e f e r r e d t o

Amon . Raphael Tuck &Sons t d . t _ [ 1 9 5 6 ~ 1 Q . B . . . 3 5 7 ., . _ [ 1 9 5 6 ~ W . L . _ K . _ 3 7 2 , , _ [ 1 9 5 6 1 _ I A l l _ E . R , _ 2 7 3(Q.B.D .)—

c o n s i d e r e d

Ayscough v . B u l l a r (1889), 1 Ch. D . 34 1 (C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

Colangelo . M i s s i s s a u g a ( C i t y ) ; Morencie . Windsor C i t y ) 19891,37 O.A.C. 321, 1 . 0 4 N. R . 298 S . C . C . )

r e f e r r e d t o

D e n e a t i o n v . R . , l 983]] . C . 14 6 T.D.)—e f e r r e d t o

F r i e n d s of Oldm an RiverSoc. . Can. Min. o f T p t . ) ,[1990]2 . C . 1 8 , 76 l t a . L.R. 2d) 89, 1991] W.W . R .

352 C . E . L . R . N.S.) , 6 8 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 375 10 8 N.R. 241 l e a v e t o a p p e a l t o S . C . C . g r a n t e d 76 l t a . L.R. 2d)

l v i i ]—p p l i e d

Curtner . C i r c u i t , _ ~ 1 9 6 8 ] 2_Q_B. S & 7 , _ j 1 9 6 8 ] . 2 . _ W _ L . R ~ 6 $ 8 . 1 9 8 . ] _ 1 A l l E . R . 32 8 C.A.)—o n s i d e r e d

Halton Community C r e d i t Union L t d . v . ICL Computers Can. t d . ( 1 9 8 5 ) , 3 C . P . C . (2 d 252 Ont. C.A.)—e -

ferred o

I . B . M . Corp, . Xerox o f an. t d . 1 9 7 7 ) , 16 N.R . 355 Fed. C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

Performing R i g h t s O r g a n i z a t i o n o f an. t d . v . CBC 1 9 8 6 ) , 7 . P . R . (3d) 33, 4 N.R. 330 Fed. C.A.)—e -

ferred o

S t a t u t e s c o n s i d e r e d :

Navigable Waters P r o t e c t i o n A c t , R . S . C . 1985, . N-22

R u l e s c o n s i d e r e d :

F e d e r a l Court u l e s , C.R.C. 1978, . 6 63

R . 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b )

O 0 1 . 3 Thom son R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Wor ks

~



Page4

1990 CarswellNat 4, 8 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4 t h )653, 114 N. R . 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W . R .

577, 7 Admin. .R. 265, 1991] F.C. 416


Department o f h e Environment A c t , R . S . C . 1 9 8 5 , c . E-]0—n v i r o n m e n t a l Assess ment and Review P r o c e s s

G u i d e l i n e s O r d e r , SOR/84-467

Appeal from o r d e r o f eed . , 75 A l t a . L.R. 2d) , 4 4 Admin. L.R. 1 0 8 , . 6 9 D.L.R. 4 t h 1 4 3 , 34 . T . R . _ 1 . 3 7 , a d d i n g

p r o v i n c i a l C r o w n a s p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t , w i t h c o n d i t i o n s a t t a c h e d , i n j u d i c i a l r e v i e w p r o c e e d i n g s ; Cross-Appeal b a s e d

o n l a c k o f u r i s d i c t i o n .

The judgment o f h e court w a s e l i v e r e d by Stone . A . :

1 T h i s i s an p p e a l from an o r d e r made by h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n o n 1 3 t h March 1990 75 l t a . L.R. 2d) ,4 4 Admin.

L.R. U8,69

.L.R. 4 t h ) 143, 34 F . T . R . 137] by which t h e a p p e l l a n t w as added a s aa r t y

r e s p o n d e n ti n s . 18 p r o -

c e e d i n g s c ommenced by w a y o f an o r i g i - n a t i n g n o t i c e o f motion f i l e d o n 1 6 t h F e b r u a r y 1990. The a p p e l l a n t had

a p p l i e d t o t h a t d i v i s io n t o be o i n e d i n t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s a s a a r t y r e s p o n d e n t o r , a l t e r n a t i v e l y , a s an i n t e r v e n e r .

2 The e l i e f s o u g h t i n t h o s e p r o c e e d i n g s a r e o r d e r s i n t h e n a t u r e o f e r t i o r a r i and mandamus o be i r e c t e d a g a i n s t

t h e M i n i s t e r o f Western Economic i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , h e M i n i s t e r of r a n s p o r t , h e M i n i s t e r o f i s h e r i e s and Oceans and

t h e M i n i s t e r o f h e Environment, e s p o n d e n t s i n t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n p r o c e e d i n g s , i n r e s p e c t o f e c i s i o n s made p e r -

t a i n i n g t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n o f a p u l p m i l l and r e l a t e d f a c i l i t i e s o n h e Peace R i v e r i n n o r t h e r n A l b e r t a .

C e n t r a l t o t h e d i s p u t e i s t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e s e d e c i s i o n s a r e a f f e c t e d by h e E n v i r o n m e n t a l Assessment and Review

P r o c e s s G u i d e l i n e s O r d e r , SOR/84-467 t h e " g u i d e l i n e s o r d e r") hich s s a i d t o be b i n d i n g u p o n h e s e m i n i s t e r s and

n o t t o have been complied w i t h .

3 T h i s a p p e a l , o g e t h e r w i t h a p p e a l s from s i m i l a r o r d e r s made o n c u r r e n t l y i n t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n i n c o u r t i l e N o s .

T-441-90(A-211- 9 0 ) , T-441-90 (A-212-90) and T-441-90 (A-225- 9 0 ) , were h e a r d a t t h e s ame t i m e . The r e a s o n s

g i v e n i n t h i s f i l e w i l l a p p l y t o t h e o t h e r i l e s and w i l l be p l a c e d o n h o s e i l e s so s t o become h e r e a s o n s f o r judgment

t h e r e i n a s w e l l e x c e p t a s m o d i f i e d o r s u p p l e m e n t e d .

The Orde r

4 I t w i l l be c o n v e n i e n t i f I s e t o u t t h e t e x t o f h e o r d e r which is a t t a c k e d F N 1

Orde r

Her Majesty h e Queen n Right o f l b e r t a i s t o be h e r e b y added s a a r t y Respondent n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s up on

t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s :

1 . No l e a d i n g s a d d i t i o n a l t o t h o s e a l r e a d y o n t h e r e c o r d ma y be i l e d by h i s R e s p o n d e n t ;




Page 5

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7,73 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 653, 114 N. R . 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 . W. R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F . C . 416

2. The conduct o f h e R e s p o n d e n t ' s c a s e must i t w i t h i n t h e t i m e frames e t o u t f o r t h e conduct o f h e c a s e by h e

p r e s e n t p a r t i e s ;

3 . The Respondent ma y a t t e n d o n any c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n s which a r e h e l d o f h e a p p l i c a n t s ' a f f i a n t s b u t i s n o t

e n t i t l e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e t h e r e i n . T h i s r e s t r i c t i o n does n o t a p p l y t o any a f f i d a v i t s f i l e d by t h e a p p l i c a n t s i n d i r e c t

r e s p o n s e t o any a f f i d a v i t s which t h i s Respo ndent might f i l e i n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s . To t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e

c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i o n o f ne f f i a n t by more h a n o ne o u n s e l might r i s e a s a e s u l t o f h i s o r d e r c o u n s e l a r e d i r e c t e d

t o a v o i d d u p l i c a t i o n and d e l a y by h e i r d e s i g n a t i n g l e a d c o u n s e l o r o t h e r w i s e d i v i d i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .

4. The e s p o n d e n t s h a l l n o t be e n t i t l e d t o c l a i m c o s t s .

A l l o f h e above c o n d i t i o n s , a r e o f o u r s e , s u b j e c t t o any e c i s i o n which h e judge h e a r i n g t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n o n t s

m e r i t s might make.

The I s s u e s

5 Two s s u e s a r e r a i s e d i n t h i s a p p e a l which r e q u i r e o u r a t t e n t i o n . The a p p e l l a n t c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n s i n

q u e s t i o n ought o be t r u c k o u t , and s p e c i a l l y s o n view o f h e f a c t t h a t t h e judge ha d l r e a d y d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e c a s e

w a s a r o p e r o ne o r t h e o i n d e r o f h e a p p e l l a n t a s a a r t y r e s p o n d e n t r a t h e r t h a n a s an n t e r v e n e r . The e s p o n d e n t by

w a y o f c r o s s - a p p e a l s u b m i t s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ought o t t o have been o i n e d a t a l l b e c a u s e t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n l a c k s

j u r i s d i c t i o n t o g r a n t r e l i e f a g a i n s t t h e a p p e l l a n t . FN2

D i s c u s s i o n

The o n d i t i o n s

6 I s h a l l d e a l i r s t w i t h t h e i s s u e r e l a t i n g t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s . The p p e l l a n t a s s e r t s a i r e c t i n t e r e s t i n t h e outcome o f

t h e p r o c e e d i n g s a s o wner o f a r a i l w a y s p u r and b r i d g e a c r o s s t h e Peace R i v e r b e i n g b u i l t i n c i d e n t a l l y t o t h e con-

s t r u c t i o n o f h e p u l p m i l l by Daishowa Canada Co. t d . As o f 3r d F e b r u a r y 1990 h e s p u r w as 97 e r c e n t c o m p l e t e

and t h e b r i d g e 26 p e r c e n t . Funding o r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h e s p u r w as e c e i v e d i n t h e amo u n t o f 9 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 from t h e

f e d e r a l Department o f Western Economic D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n . F u r t h e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t a s s e r t s t h a t A l b e r t a a c t u a l l y i s s u e d

p e r m i t s f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h e p u l p m i l l a s w e l l a s an i n t e r i m l i c e n c e f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h e w a t e r i n -

t a k e / e f f l u e n t o u t f a l l f a c i l i t i e s i n t o t h e Peace R i v e r , w i t h a r i g h t t o d i v e r t w a t e r from t h a t r i v e r . These a c i l i t i e s were

exempted from t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f h e N a v i g a b l e Waters P r o t e c t i o n A c t , R . S . C . 1985, c . N- 2 2 , by t h e M i n i s t e r o f

T r a n s p o r t w ho a l s o g r a n t e d an a p p r o v a l t o t h e a p p e l l a n t i n r e s p e c t o f h e b r i d g e p u r s u a n t t o t h e s ame s t a t u t e . The

a p p e l l a n t , a c c o r d i n g l y , c o n t e n d s t h a t s h e s h o u l d have been g r a n t e d f u l l r e s p o n d e n t s t a n d i n g , f r e e o f h e c o n d i t i o n s

c o n t a i n e d i n t h e o r d e r . As she p u t s i t i n p a r a .6 f e r memorandum:

6. l b e r t a has an immediate n t e r e s t i n t h e outcome o f h e c u r r e n t p r o c e e d i n g s f l o w i n g from t s ownership o f h e

B r i d g e and t h e s p u r . F u r t h e r m o r e , A l b e r t a o w n s n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s g e n e r a l l y i n t h e P r o v i n c e o f l b e r t a and h a s

e x c l u s i v e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n t o d e a l w i t h h e r n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a s s h e s e e s f i t , i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t t o i s s u e

C O 2013 Thom s on R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page6

1990 CarswellNat4, 8 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4 t h ) 53, 114 N.R. 5 3 , 38 . T . R . 240 n o t e ) ,[1991]2 . W. R .

577, 7 Admin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C.416

p e r m i t s , l i c e n s e s and o g e n e r a l l y manage h e s e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s .

The o n d i t i o n s imposed, he s u b m i t s , would hamper h e r a b i l i t y t o adduce e v i d e n c e , t o c r o s s -examine any w i t n e s s e s

a d v e r s e i n i n t e r e s t and o make u b m i s s i o n s .

7 The l e a r n e d judge below gave t h e f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n s f o r imposing t h e impugned c o n d i t i o n s ( a p p e a l book, p .

I n t h i s c a s e , I have c o m e o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e c o u r s e of c t i o n i s t o add A l b e r t a an d Daishowa s

p a r t y r e s p o n d e n t s b u t w i t h v e r y s t r i c t c o n d i t i o n s a t t a c h e d t o t h e r o l e s t h e y ma y l a y . T h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s b a s e d on

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o n l y r e a s o n t o add them a s r e s p o n d e n t s, i n s t e a d of s i n t e r v e n e r s , s t o a c c o r d them a p p e a l r i g h t s .

I t i s b a s e d on a o n s c i o u s n e s s of h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t t h e i n i t i a t i n g p a r t y i n a l e g a l p r o c e e d i n g s h o u l d n o r m a l l y be

a b l e t o choose w ho s added a s a a r t y and o c o n t r o l t h e g e n e r a l s t r u c t u r e of h e c a s e . t i s b a s e d v e r y h e a v i l y on

t h e f a c t t h a t t h e arguments on h e a p p l i c a t i o n w i l l be a r g e l y l e g a l i n n a t u r e ( t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h e

E.A.R.P. u i d e l i n e s and t h e r e s p e c t i v e p i e c e s of e d e r a l l e g i s l a t u r e ) a s w e l l a s o n h e f a c t t h a t a l l of h e r e l e v a n t

e v i d e n c e s h o u l d be n t h e c o n t r o l and h e knowledge of h e p r e s e n t r e s p o n d e n t s .

Rule 1716 o n t e m p l a t e s t h a t such terms and o n d i t i o n s ma y be imposed, when a r t i e s a r e added, f t i s j u s t t o do

s o . I n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e I t h i n k t h e f o l l o w i n g terms i t w i t h i n t h a t c a t e g o r y . While A l b e r t a an d Daishowa s h o u l d

have h e r i g h t t o c a l l e v i d e n c e i . e . , t o i l e a f f i d a v i t e v i d e n c e ) and o c r o s s-examine f f i a n t s of ny f f i d a v i t s f i l e d

i n r e p l y t h e r e t o , I do o t t h i n k t h e y s h o u l d be b l e t o add o t h e i s s u e s which h e a p p l i c a n t s have s t a b l i s h e d a s t h e

framework of h e i r c a s e . They w i l l n o t be g i v e n any i g h t t o f i l e p l e a d i n g s , b u t must a k e t h e p l e a d i n g s a s t h e y

p r e s e n t l y e x i s t . With e s p e c t t o t h e c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i o n of h e a p p l i c a n t s ' a f f i a n t s , t h e y w i l l be e n t i t l e d t o a t t e n d a s

o b s e r v e r s t h e r e o n b u t n o t t o p a r t i c i p a t e t h e r e i n . The d d i t i o n of l b e r t a and Daishowa s r e s p o n d e n t s s h o u l d n o t

be a l l o w e d t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h o r d e l a y t h e t i m e t a b l e which h e a p p l i c a n t s and h e p r e s e n t r e s p o n d e n t s e i t h e r a g r e e

u pon o r which h e a p p l i c a n t s c o n v i n c e t h e c o u r t t o impose. n t h i s r e g a r d , h e o r d e r a d d i n g A l b e r t a and Daishowa

as e s p o n d e n t s w i l l be o n h e e x p r e s s c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e y i t t h e m s e l v e s w i t h i n t h a t t i m e t a b l e . I n a d d i t i o n , I do o t

b e l i e v e t h a t e i t h e r s h o u l d be a b l e t o c l a i m c o s t s . O r d e r s w i l l i s s u e i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e s e r e a s o n s .

8 The l e a r n e d judge below r e l i e d o n R . 1 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) FN3 b y w ay of n a l o g y . She w as of h e view t h a t t h e a p -

p e l l a n t ' s p r e s e n c e b e f o r e t h e c o u r t w as n o t " n e c e s s a r y , " and no a t t a c k i s made on t h a t c o n c l u s i o n . The ground upon

which she seems o have d e c i d e d t o o i n t h e a p p e l l a n t a s a a r t y r e s p o n d e n t w as h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t "ought o have been

j o i n e d , " though h e a l s o t h o u g h t t h e o i n d e r s h o u l d be e r m i t t e d b e c a u s e s h e b e l i e v e d t h e a p p e l l a n t wished t o a c q u i r e

r i g h t s of p p e a l " a p p e a l book, . 31 ) p p .6 7 ] .

9 Rule 1 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) s n o t p e c u l i a r t o p r a c t i c e and p r o c e d u r e i n t h e F e d e r a l C o u r t . t , o r a a r i a t i o n of t , has been af e a t u r e of h e r u l e s g o v e r n i n g p r a c t i c e an d p r o c e d u r e i n t h e Supreme Court of n t a r i o s i n c e a t l e a s t 1913. t w as

a p p a r e n t l y i n h e r i t e d from E n g l a n d . t i s n o t a u l e f o r o i n i n g an i n t e r v e n e r b u t f o r o i n i n g a a r t y . There s , of o u r s e ,

a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p o s i t i o n of an i n t e r v e n e r i n p r o c e e d i n g s and t h a t of a p a r t y . The i n t e r v e n e r , f o r

example, must s a u l e t a k e t h e r e c o r d a s he i n d s i t . He a s no t a t u s t o p u r s u e an p p e a l : T o r o n t o ( C i t y ) v . Morencie,

S.C.C. N o . 21207, udgment e n d e r e d 1 7 t h A p r i l 1989 r e p o r t e d C o l a n g e l o v . M i s s i s s a u g a ( C i t y ) ; Morencie v . Win-

dsor C i t y ) ,37 O.A.C. 32 , , 104 N. R . 9 8 ] . On h e o t h e r hand, a r t y o i n e d by r d e r of o u r t w i l l n o r m a l l y e n j o y t h e

O O 2013 Thom s on R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 7

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4th) 53, 11 4 N.R. 153,38 F.T.R. 240 n o t e ) ,[1991]2 .W . R .

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C. 4 16

same i g h t s as h o s e of t h e r p a r t i e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t t o adduce e v i d e n c e and o make u b m i s s i o n s . t has been a i d ,

i n d e e d , t h a t he h o l d s an a b s o l u t e r i g h t t o c r o s s-examine w i t n e s s e s a d v e r s e i n i n t e r e s t : s e e Halton C o m n z z ~ n i t y C r e d i t

U ~ t i o r ~ L t c ~ n . . I C L Computers C an. Ltd 1985 3 .P.C. 2d ) 52 t 253 Ont C .A .

10 T h e r e a l q u e s t i o n a t t h i s s t a g e i s whether t h e judge below, i n imposing t h e c o n d i t i o n s i n q u e s t i o n , a c t e d

p r o p e r l y w i t h i n t h e d i s c r e t i o n v e s t e d i n h e r by R. 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) . T hat i s c r e t i o n i s undoubtedly broad—on such terms

as t t h i n k s j u s t " —but t i s not an a b s o l u t e power t o be e x e r c i s e d w i t h f u l l and complete d i s c r e t i o n . Such a broad

d i s c r e t i o n i s s u b j e c t t o t h e c o n s t r a i n t of being e x e r c i s e d upon r e a s o n a b l e grounds: e e , e . g . , P e r f o r f n i n g Ruts f • -

~ a i ~ i ~ u t i o n ofCan. z i ~ v . CBC l986, C R 3d) 33, 4 N R 330 t 339 F ed CA , p e r Heald J . A . Although h i s

c o u r t must be slow t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e e x e r c i s e of a i s c r e t i o n such a s t h i s , t may do so on e r t a i n l i m i t e d grounds,

i n c l u d i n g i f we hould f i n d t h a t t h e o r d e r i s not j u s t and r e a s o n a b l e " : s e e , e . g . , LB.M. C o f ~ ~ . v . Xei° o x of c e n . L t c ~

(1977), 16 N.R. 35 5 Fed. . A . ) ; Algonquin M e r c a n t i l e Corp. . D a r t i n d u s t . Can. t d . (1984),5 . I . P . R . 40,3 .P.R.

d} 143 Fed. . A . ) .

11 T h e s . 18 a p p l i c a t i o n i s , a s I have s a i d , brought a g a i n s t s e v e r a l f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s . I f t s u c c e e d s , t h e c o n s e -

quences o r t h e a p p e l l a n t could w e l l be q u i t e s e v e r e . Money h e a p p e l l a n t has n v e s t e d i n t h e b r i d g e and a i l w a y s p u r

might be pu t i n jeopardy i f t h e m i l l i s u n a b l e t o o p e r a t e o r i t s o p e r a t i o n i s d e l a y e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on account of h e

f a i l u r e of h e f e d e r a l m i n i s t e r s t o comply w i t h t h e g u i d e l i n e s o r d e r , assuming h a t o r d e r i s found t o be b i n d i n g upon

them. T h e f f i c a c y of any e r m i t s and l i c e n c e s i s s u e d under r o v i n c i a l l aw o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of h e m i l l a s w e l l a s f o r

t h e i n t a k e / o u t f a l l f a c i l i t i e s on t h e b a s i s of a e d e r a l exemption g r a n t e d t o t h e m i l l owner Daishowa Canada Co. t d .

p u r s u a n t t o t h e Navigable Waters r o t e c t i o n Act, might be pu t n q u e s t i o n . Yet, h e a p p e l l a n t w i l l not be a b l e t o a d -

duce her own vidence and advance h e r own arguments t h a t t h e g u i d e l i n e s o r d e r i s i n a p p l i c a b l e because a f e d -

e r a l - p r o v i n c i a l agreement u r p o r t s t o l e a v e e n v i r o n m e n t a l a s s e s s m e n t of h e p r o j e c t i n t h e hands of h e p r o v i n c e . Sh e

w i l l be r e v e n t e d , l s o , from d e l v i n g f u l l y i n t o any s p e c t of h e m a t t e r which may e a r upon h e e x e r c i s e of i s c r e t i o n

v e s t e d i n t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n under . 1 8 .

12 T h e r d e r below s somewhat of y b r i d , a r t a k i n g of e a t u r e s both of n r d e r o i n i n g a a r t y s i m p l i c i t e r and,

w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n of h e c o n d i t i o n s , of an o r d e r g r a n t i n g i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s . I am ot a t a l l c e r t a i n t h a t t h e judge w as

c o r r e c t i n adding h o s e c o n d i t i o n s . . [ F N 4 1

13 We ave not had drawn t o ou r a t t e n t i o n any c a s e i n which a c o u r t , having d e c i d e d t o j o i n a p a r t y b e f o r e a

m a t t e r w as e a r d , u a l i f i e d t h e r o l e of h e ne w a r t y i n such fundamental ways s t h o s e found n t h e c o n d i t i o n s . Those

c o n d i t i o n s go a long way, n my p i n i o n , towards e d u c i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r o l e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s t o more i k e t h a t of

an i n t e r v e n e r than of a f u l l p a r t y . T h e y l i m i t t h e a p p e l l a n t i n t h e e v i d e n c e she may wish t o adduce, i n

c r o s s-examination and n t h e p o s i t i o n she may is h o a d o p t . T h e y e q u i r e t h e a p p e l l a n t , n e f f e c t , o t a k e t h e r e c o r d a s

she f i n d s i t and t o conform t o a " t i m e t a b l e " f o r t h e h e a r i n g of h e s . 18 a p p l i c a t i o n r e g a r d l e s s of h e impact t h a t

t i m e t a b l e may ave on h e a b i l i t y of h e a p p e l l a n t t o advance h e r own o s i t i o n . FNS

14 T h e o r d e r below a l s o d e p r i v e s t h e a p p e l l a n t of o s t s i n t h e s . 18 r o c e e d i n g s even though h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n i s

l e f t t o t h e judge h e a r i n g t h a t a p p l i c a t i o n . I n my ie w such a c o n d i t i o n c o u l d w e l l a f f e c t t h e w a y n which t h a t judge

e x e r c i s e s t h e d i s c r e t i o n i n t h e m a t t e r . t would have been b e t t e r t o say o t h i n g about o s t s and e a v e t h e m a t t e r e n t i r e l y

i n t h e hands of h a t judge, o be e x e r c i s e d i n t h e w ay he o r she ma y e e l most a p p r o p r i a t e having r e g a r d t o t h e c i r -

O 013 T homson e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 8~~

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d ) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4th) 53, 114 N.R. 153,38 .T.R.24 0 n o t e ) ,[1991]2W.W.R.

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C.416

cumstances p r e v a i l i n g a t the time t h e d i s c r e t i o n i s t o be e x e r c i s e d . That udge i s i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o make h e de-

c i s i o n u n a f f e c t e d by h e views of h e l e a r n e d motions udge formed t t h e p r e l i m i n a r y s t a g e .

15 In summary h e o r d e r , i n my iew, s not j u s t and reasonable" because of h e c o n d i t i o n s i t imposes. would

d e l e t e t h o s e c o n d i t i o n s .

J u r i s d i c t i o n

16 I t now becomes n e c e s s a r y t o a d d r e s s t h e s u b m i s s i o n of h e r e s p o n d e n t s i n t h e i r c r o s s-a p p e a l t h a t t h e judge

below ought o t t o h a v e o i n e d t h e a p p e l l a n t b e c a u s e no l a i m f o r r e l i e f s made g a i n s t h e r , and l s o b e c a u s e t h e T r i a l

D i v i s i o n would l a c k j u r i s d i c t i o n t o g r a n t r e l i e f t o t h e a p p e l l a n t u n d e r t h e i n v o k e d l e g i s l a t i o n : Dene N a t i o n v . R . . 1

j ] _ 9 8 3 1 . 1 F . C ; , _ 1 4 6 T . D . ) . T he o u r t s h a v e sometimes o i n e d a a r t y d e f e n d a n t even h o u g h no e l i e f would be o u g h t

a g a i n s t him C u r t n e r v . C i r c u i t L j 1 9 6 8 ] 2 .B. 8 7 , . _ j 1 9 6 8 1 . 2 W.L:R. 688, 1 9 6 8 1 I A l l E _ R . 328 C . A . ) ) , and have

r e c o g n i z e d a l s o t h a t t h e p a r t y j o i n e d would be e n a b l e d t o r e s i s t t h e r e l i e f s o u g h t and be h e a r d on t h e t e r m s of any

judgment: compare t m o ~ ~ . Raphael : ~ c k & o n s . G t d , 1956] Q.B.357 t 3 8 3 L ~ 1 9 5 6 ] , , 2 W.L.R. 7 2 . , _ . [ 1 9 5 6 1 , . 1 A l l

E , R . 7 3 _ ( Q . f 3 . D . ) . Much i l l depend upon h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of h e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e . T h i s c o u r t h a s been i l l i n g t o o i n

a a r t y i n p r o c e e d i n g s s u c h a s t h e s e s i m p l y b e c a u s e , a s t h a t p a r t y ' s r i g h t s w i l l be i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by h e outcome of

t h e d i s p u t e , he h o u l d be n a b l e d t o a s s e r t r i g h t s of p p e a l : A d i d a s C a n . ) t d . v . Skoro n t . t d . . , 1 9 7 _ l , a _ F C . 8 2 , . _ 1 2

C _ P . R . . ~ 2 d ~ 6 7 C . A . ) ; r i e n d s of ldman R i v e r S o c . v . Can. M i » . n T~tL990]2 . C . 1 8 , 76 l t a . L . R . ~ 2 d ~ 289

j1991] _ W , W . R . . . 3 5 2 ~ 5 C . E _ L ~ R . ~N_S~_1 _ 6 8 D . L . K _ ~ 4 t h ~ 3 7 5 , , 1 0 8 N.R_ 4 1 ~ C ~ A , Z . T he r i n c i p l e e n u n c i a t e d by h i s

c o u r t i n Adidas would a p p e a r t o a p p l y w i t h even g r e a t e r f o r c e w h e r e , a s h e r e , t h e s . 18 a p p l i c a t i o n i s s t i l l p e n d i n g i n

t h e T r i a l D i v i s i o n .

Disposition

17 I should add on e f i n a l word b e f o r e d i s p o s i n g of h i s a p p e a l . T h e respondents f e a r t h a t t h e presence of he

a p p e l l a n t as a u l l p a r t y w i l l e n l a r g e and delay t h e s . 18 proceedings and w i l l add t o t h e c o s t s . I agree t h a t a l l t h e s e

t h i n g s a r e p o s s i b l e , b u t , s u r e l y , t h e s e a r e but consequences which may normally flow from any e g a l proceedings i n

which a h i r d p a r t y ' s r i g h t s w i l l be i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by h e outcome. T h e o u r t has power o c o n t r o l i t s own rocess n

order o ensure h a t u s t i c e i s done and, o t h a t end, t may n a p p r o p r i a t e circumstances deal with any obvious abuse of

i t s process i n a a r i e t y of ays n c l u d i n g by the levying of o s t s . No uch abuse s evident on th e record b e f o r e u s .

18 I n t h e r e s u l t I would l l o w t h e a p p e a l w i t h c o s t s and would amend h e o r d e r made 3 t h March 1990 by e l e t i n g

t h e r e f r o m a l l of h e words commencing i t h t h e words upon h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s : " so h a t t h e o r d e r a s amended

w i l l r e a d :

Her M a j e s t y t h e Queen n R i g h t of l b e r t a i s t o be h e r e b y added a s a a r t y R e s p o n d e n t i n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s .

T he t y l e of a u s e i n t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n s h a l l be amended o r e f l e c t t h e a d d i n g of er a j e s t y t h e Queen n R i g h t of

A l b e r t a a s a a r t y R e s p o n d e n t .

D 01 3 Thomson e u t e r s . No laim o O r i g . G o v t . Works



boPage9

1990 CarswellNat 4,78 l t a . L.R. 2d) 7, 3 D.L.R. 4th) 53, 11 4 N . R . 153, 8 F.T.R. 240 n o t e ) , 1991]2 .W . R .

577,47 dmin. L.R. 265, 1991] F.C. 416

19 T h e r o s s-appeal s d i s m i s s e d .

(b) r d e r any p e r s o n who ught o have been o i n e d a s a p a r t y o r w h o s e p r e s e n c e b e f o r e t h e Court i s n e c e s s a r y t o

ensure h a t a l l m a t t e r s i n d i s p u t e i n t h e a c t i o n maybe f f e c t u a l l y and c o m p l e t e l y determined and a d j u d i c a t e d upon, o

be added a s a p a r t y .

Appeal l l o w e d , • c r o s s-appeal i s m i s s e d .

FN S i m i l a r l y , t h e o r d e r i n c o u r t f il e N o . A-225-90 w as made i n favour o f h e a p p e l l a n t , w h i l e i n c o u r t f i l e Nos.

A-21 1- 90 and A-212- 90 h e o r d e r s were made n favour of aishowa Canada Co. t d . , t h e a p p e l l a n t t h e r e i n .

FN2 o r o s s-appeal w as launched i n t h e o t h e r m a t t e r s no w pending b e f o r e u s .

FN3 2) At any s t a g e of an a c t i o n t h e Court may, on such terms a s i t t h i n k s j u s t and e i t h e r of t s own otion o r o n

a p p l i c a t i o n ,

FN4 do not t h i n k i t d e s i r a b l e t o l a y do wn a g e n e r a l r u l e f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of h e words of d i s c r e t i o n i n R .

1 7 1 6 ( 2 ) ( b ) . While h e r u l e g i v e s no guidance as o t h e w ay h e d i s c r e t i o n s h o u l d be e x e r c i s e d , t p e r m i t s a udge, t a

minimum, o r e q u i r e an p p l i c a n t t o pay h e c o s t s o f h e i n t e r l o c u t o r y a p p l i c a t i o n s e e , . g . ,A cough . B u l l a r (1889),

41 C h . D . 34 l (C~A.~; A.G. . Pontypridd Waterwor ks Ca., 1908] C h . 388 C h . . ) ) , though t i s b r o a d e r than h a t .

Such an o r d e r a s t o c o s t s would no t n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e o r d i n a r y r i g h t s t h e p e r s o n j o i n e d may x e r c i s e a s a a r t y i n t h e

u n d e r l y i n g p r o c e e d i n g s .

F N , S At h e h e a r i n g we ere o l d t h a t t h e s . 18 p p l i c a t i o n i s no w c h e d u l e d t o be heard n e a r l y 1991. h e g r e e d u p on

" t i m e t a b l e " seems h u s t o have been o v e r t a k e n by v e n t s i n t h a t i t w as p p a r e n t l y drawn w i t h a view t o a a t e i n J u l y

1990 w h e n h e p l a n t w as expected t o commence p e r a t i o n s , which t d i d .

ENDOFDOCUMENT

D 013 T h o mson e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Work s





~

Page 1

2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 011 FC 58

2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 011 FC 58

Sandy Pond A l l i a n c e t o P r o t e c t Canadian Waters n c . v . Canada A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l )

Sandy Pond A l l i a n c e t o P r o t e c t Canadian Waters n c . , A p p l i c a n t and Her a j e s t y t h e Queen n R i g h t of anada s R e p r e s e n t e d

by h e A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , Respondent

F e d e r a l Court

E. Heneghan .

Heard: September 1 0 , 2010

Judgment: e b r u a r y 1 0 , 2011

Docket: T-8 88-1 0

D homson R e u t e r s Canada i m i t e d o r t s L i c e n s o r s e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u r t d o c u m e n t s ) . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .

P r o c e e d i n g s : e v e r s e d i n p a r t Sandy ondAlliance o P r o t e c t Canadian W a t e r s n c . v . Canada A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ) ~ 2 0 1 1 . , 2 0]

FCA 129, 201 CarswellNat 121 F . C . A . )

C o u n s e l : Owen yers, o r A p p l i c a n t

Douglas Hamilton, h r i s t o p h e r A . Wayland, o r I n t e r v e n e r , Vale n c o L t d .

James h i s t l e , Q . C . , o r I n t e r v e n e r , Mining A s s o c i a t i o n of anada and Mining A s s o c i a t i o n of r i t i s h Columbia

S u b j e c t : C i v i l P r a c t i c e and r o c e d u r e ; N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s

C i v i l p r a c t i c e and p r o c e d u r e -- - P a r t i e s—n t e r v e n o r s—s a r t y

A p p l i c a n t e n v i r o n m e n t a l group c o m m e n c e d a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w t o c h a l l e n g e p r o v i s i o n s of mining r e g u l a t i o n s—Environmental group s o u g h t d e c l a r a t i o n t h a t p o r t i o n s of e g u l a t i o n s were u n l a w f u l c o n t r a r y t o F i s h e r i e s A c t —Three ining

o r g a n i z a t i o n s sought motion t o i n t e r v e n e w i t h f u l l r i g h t s of e s p o n d e n t s—otion g r a n t e d —One ining com p any p r o p o s e d

t o o f f e r e v i d e n c e of h ow mining c o u l d t a k e p l a c e i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e manner —Two ining o r g a n i z a t i o n s p r o -

posed t o o f f e r e v i d e n c e on h ow o t h e r mining p r o j e c t s would be a f f e c t e d i f l a n d w as d e c l a r e d u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l —Test o r

i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s i n c l u d e d f a c t o r s of e i n g d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by outcome, u b l i c i n t e r e s t p o s i t i o n n o t b e i n g d e f e n d e d by a r t y t o

c a s e and e f f e c t of n t e r v e n o r on i n t e r e s t s of u s t i c e —Not l l f a c t o r s ha d t o be m et o a l l o w i n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s—lthough

O 013 Thom son R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. W o r k s



boPage 2

2011 CarswellNat 294, 2011 FC 58

mining o r g a n i z a t i o n s not d i r e c tl y a f f e c t e d , t h e y had l e g i t i m a t e i n t e r e s t i n p r o c e e d i n g s t h a t w as not defended by p a r t y r e -

spondents —Court ould be s s i s t e d by e a r i n g p e r s p e c t i v e s o f ining r g a n i z a t i o n s—n t e r v e n o r s t a t u s g r a n t e d o n a s i s t h a t

mining o r g a n i z a t i o n s could f i l e a p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d , b r i n g e v i d e n c e and make arguments o n l i s t e d i s s u e s—ining o r g a n i z a -

t i o n s could not r o s s -examine, r i n g motions r a p p e a l i n t e r l o c u t o r y o r d e r s .

Cases considered by E. Heneghan J . :

C a n a d a Prime M i n i s t e r ) v . Khadr~2009) 2009 CarswellNat 4062, 2009 FCA 186, 2009 CarswellNat 5338,?009 CAF

186 F.C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

Canadian a c i f i c Railway . Boutique Jacob n c . 2006 2006 CarswellNat 1 5 8 8 0 0 _ 6 _ FCA 26..2006 Carswe]1Nat 6 2 7 , .

2006 CAF 26,~Lub nom.l3~i~t~ue Jncob n c , . _ y . P u n t a i n e r . L t c f • L 3 5 7 N.R. 384 F.C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

C h r e t i e n v . C a n a d a A t t o r n e y General)52005) 2005 FC 41 2005 CarsweliNat 1036,273 F . T . R . 219(E~, 9 dm i n.

L . R . .(4th) 9 . 5 (F.C.)—o n s i d e r e d

Edmonton Friends o f h e No rth Environmental o c i e t y v . Ca na d a M i n i s t e r o f estern Economic i v e r s a f i c a t i o n ) l 990

38 F.T.R.240 note) 78 l t a . L . . R .(2d) 7 (199112 W.W.R. 77,47 C ~ I l l l l l . L , .R.265, 1 9 9 1 1 l F.C.416, 11 4 N.R. 153.

1990 CarswellNat 4, 1990 ClrswellNat 719,73 D.L.R. 4th) 53 Fed. C.A.)—e f e r r e d t o

Hislop v . C a n a d a A t t o r n e y General) 2007) 222 O.A.C. 324 3 7 . F . L . 6th) ~4 O.R. 3d) 0~note), 78 D.L.R. 4t h

385, sub n o m . C a n a d a A t t o r n e y General v . 1 - f i s d o ~ ) X 2 0 0 7 1 1 S.C.R.4292007SCC 0, 2007 CarswellOut 1049,2007

CarswellOnt 1050, 358 N.R. 197, sub n o m . . . Hislop) l 53 C.R.R.(2d~S.C.C.)—ollowed

Rothmans, Benson &Hedges n c . v . Ca na d a A t t o r n e y General) 1989) [1990] 1 F.C. 74 , 1989 CarswellNat 663, 29

F.T.R.267 41 A d min. . , . R . 102 1989 CarswellNat 594 Fed. T.D.)—o l l o w e d

S t a t u t e s considered:

Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, . F-7

s . 1 8 . 1 ( 1 ) e n . 1990, . 8, . 5]—o n s i d e r e d

F i s h e r i e s Act, R.S.C. 1985 , . F-14


s . 1—e f e r r e d t o

s . 34(2)—e f e r r e d t o

O 013 T h o m s o n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. W o r k s



X0Page 3

2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 2011 FC 58

s . 36(5)—e f e r r e d t o

s . 38(9)—e f e r r e d t o

Rules c o n s i d e r e d :

Federal C o u r t s R u l e s , SOR/98-106


R. 109—o n s i d e r e d

R. 109(3)—o n s i d e r e d

R. 303(1)—o n s i d e r e d


F i s h e r i e s A c t , R . S . C . 1985, . F-14

Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s , SOR/2002-222


s . 5—e f e r r e d t o

s . 2 7 . 1 [ e n . SOR/2006-239]—e f e r r e d t o

Sched.2—e f e r r e d t o

MOTION y mining o r g a n i z a t i o n s f o r l e a v e t o i n t e r v e n e i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l law m a t t e r .

E. Hen egJ:a n J . :

1 Vale I n c o L t d .(Vale" ) , t h e Mining A s s o c i a t i o n o f Canada(MAC") nd t h e Mining A s s o c i a t i o n o f r i t i s h Columbia

(MABC" ) c o l l e c t i v e l y , t h e "Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s" ) e e k l e a v e , p u r s u a n t t o t h e Federal C o u r t s R u l e s , SOR/98-106 t h e

"Rules" ) o i n t e r v e n e i n t h e w i t h i n p r o c e e d i n g w i t h a l l r i g h t s o f a r e s p o n d e n t i n c l u d i n g b u t n o t l i m i t e d t o , t h e r i g h t t o r a i s e

p r e l i m i n a r y o b j e c t i o n s , b r i n g m o t i o n s , i l e e v i d e n c e , make l e g a l s u b m i s s i o n s , and a p p e a l any and a l l o r d e r s an d judgments.

A l t e r n a t i v e l y , t h e y seek s t a t u s a s p a r t i e s .

O 013 T h o m s o n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page41~

2011 CarswellNat 294, 01 1 FC 58

2 Sandy Pond l l i a n c e t o P r o t e c t Canadian Waters n c . t h e " A p p l i c a n t") ommenced h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l review n

o r d e r t o c h a l l e n g e c e r t a i n p r o v i s i o n s of h e Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s , SOR/2002-222 t h e " R e g u l a t i o n s") nd e e k s

t h e f o l l o w i n g r e l i e f

3. The p p l i c a n t makes p p l i c a t i o n f o r : D e c l a r a t o r y R e l i e f a s f o l l o w s :

(a)A e c l a r a t i o n t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s of h e Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s , SOR/2002-222 s amended r e

unlawful as being c o n t r a r y t o t h e F i s h e r i e s Act R . S . , c . F- 1 4 , . 1] an d u l t r a v i c e s t h e a u t h o r i t y g r a n t e d t o t h e Gov-

e r n o r i n Council p u r s u a n t t o t h e F i s h e r i e s Act and s u b s e c t i o n s 3 4 ( 2 ) , 36(5) and 38(9) of h e F i s h e r i e s Act an d a r e

hereby e c l a r e d t o b e of o o r c e an d e f f e c t :

i . SCHEDULE2 f h e Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s

i i . S e c t i o n 5 f h e Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s

i i i . S e c t i o n 2 7 . 1 of h e Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s

4. That n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t o (a) bove, a e c l a r a t i o n t h a t t h e Governor n Council a c t e d beyond t s j u r i s d i c t i o n or w i t h o u t

j u r i s d i c t i o n i n i s s u i n g SOR/2006-239, October 3, 2006 an d c r e a t i n g SCHEDULE , e c t i o n 5 nd S e c t i o n 2 7 . 1 of h e

Metal Mining f f l u e n t R e g u l a t i o n s .

3 The Applicant i s anot-f o r -p r o f i t c o r p o r a t i o n r e g i s t e r e d i n Newfoundland an d Labrador, p u r s u a n t t o t h e laws of h a t

p r o v i n c e . According o t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n documents, h e A p p l i c a n t w as n c o r p o r a t e d f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g pu r p o s e s :

The o r p o r a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g purposes an d h a l l r e s t r i c t i t s e l f o such c t i v i t i e s a s i n t s o p i n i o n , i r e c t l y

o r i n d i r e c t l y , f u r t h e r s such p u r p o s e s :

a)To r o t e c t and conserve Canadian w a t e r s and h e i r ecosystems; an d

b )To a k e a p p r o p r i a t e a c t i o n s t o a s s i s t t h e A l l i a n c e i n f u l f i l l i n g i t s p u r p o s e , i n c l u d i n g promoting an d recommending

laws and p o l i c i e s , an d informing an d engaging h e p u b l i c ; an d

c)To o i n an d/ o r c o o p e r a t e w i t h o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s o r i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h s i m i l a r p u r p o s e s .

4 Her Majesty h e Queen n Right of anada s Represented b y h e A t t o r n e y General t h e "Respondent") s t h e Respondent

i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w . The R e g u l a t i o n s were p a s s e d p u r s u a n t t o t h e F i s h e r i e s A c t , R.S.C. 1985, . F- 1 4 . Th e

Respondent a k e s no p o s i t i o n on h e motions b y h e Proposed n t e r v e n e r s and d i d not a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e h e a r i n g of h e motions

brought b y Vale,MAC nd MABC.




Page 5 ~ O


5 Th e Applicant s c h a l l e n g i n g the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of chedule2 f h e R e g u l a t i o n s , a s w e l l as e c t i o n s 5 nd 2 7 . 1 of h e

Regulations as being,among t h e r t h i n g s , c o n t r a r y t o t h e p r o t e c t i o n an d c o n s e r v a t i o n o f f i s h h a b i t a t which s the purpose of h e

F i s h e r i e s Act.

6 Th e focus of the A p p l i c a n t ' s c h a l l e n g e t o t h e Regulations i s t h e i n c l u s i o n of a body of water k no w n as S a n d y Pond,

l o c a t e d i n t h e Long Harbour a r e a on h e Avalon Peninsula of h e Province of ewfoundland an d Labrador. The i n c l u s i o n of

S a n d y Po n d o n Schedule 2 f h e Regulations means h a t t h a t body of water i s e l i g i b l e t o b e used as a a i l i n g s im pou n d me n t

area n connection with c e r t a i n o p e r a t i o n s c a r r i e d ou t n Long Harbour b y Vale.

Th e r i e f statement of a c t s t h a t appears below s c u l l e d from h e a f f i d a v i t s f i l e d t o d a t e i n t h i s proceeding.

8 Th e Applic ant has i l e d t h e a f f i d a v i t of r. John Gibson, a i s h e r i e s s c i e n t i s t . The Respondent has i l e d t h e a f f i d a v i t s of

Mr . Marvin A. arnes an d Mr . hris Doiron.

9 Val e has f i l e d t h e a f f i d a v i t s of Mr . Don tevens and Ms . Margarette L i v i e . MAC i l e d t h e a f f i d a v i t of Mr. Gordon

Peeling and theMABC i l e d the a f f i d a v i t of Mr. i e r r e G r a f t o n .

10 Th e Applicant f i l e d the a f f i d a v i t of Dr . John Gibson, a f i s h e r i e s s c i e n t i s t . Dr . Gibson expressed opinions about h e

harmful f f e c t on he c o n s e r v a t i o n f u n c t i o n of he i s h e r i e s A c t e s u l t i n g from h e i n c l u s i o n of andy Po n d on Schedule2 f h e

Regulations.

11 Vale i s a Canadian c om p any with s i g n i f i c a n t mining o p e r a t i o n s throughout Canada. Vale Inco Newfoundland an d

Labrador Limited s a wholly o w n e d u b s i d i a r y of ale, p e r a t i n g a l a n t a t Long Harbour, l a c e n t i a Bay, ewfoundland an d

Labrador. The Long Harbour o p e r a t i o n i s embarking on a proposed n i c k e l p r o c e s s i n g p l a n t . That p l a n t w i l l g e n e r a t e t a i l i n g s

an d r e q u i r e a a i l i n g s im pou n d me n t r e a . C u r r e n t l y , e i g h t e e n " T a i l i n g s im pou n d me n t r e a s " a r e d e s c r i b e d i n Schedule2 f h e

Regulations b y h e i r geographic c o o r d i n a t e s .

12 In December 2007, o i s e y ' s B ay Nickel Company imited(VBNC" ) , t h e former owner of h e Long Harbour Proc-

e s s i n g P l a n t , submitted a r e q u e s t t o t h e Department of i s h e r i e s an d Oceans(DFO") o amend t h e Regulations t o i n c l u d e

hydrometallurgical l a n t s , such as h e proposed r o j e c t , as a e g u l a t e d o p e r a t i o n and o d e s i g n a t e S a n d y Po n d as a management

an d s t o r a g e s i t e . On une 10,2009, Sandy Po n d w as included on Schedule2 f h e Re g u l a t i o n s .

13 The h i s t o r y of h e s t e p s taken t o o b t a i n t h e r e q u e s t e d amendment s s e t ou t n t h e a f f i d a v i t of Mr . Marvin A . Barnes,

Regional Manager, nvironmental Assessment an d Major r o j e c t s withDFO. hi s f f i d a v i t was i l e d b y h e Re sponde nt n t h e

responding a p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d , r e l a t i v e t o t h e underlying a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l review.

14 Mr . hris Doiron s the Chiefof h e Mining S e c t i o n of h e Mining and Processing D i v i s i o n of nvironment Canada n

Ottawa. n i s a f f i d a v i t , he t a t e s t h a t he played h e p r i n c i p a l s u p e r v i s o r y r o l e w i t h i n Environment Canada e l a t i v e t o r e g u l a t o r y

p r o c e s s l e a d i n g up t o t h e i n c l u s i o n of Sandy Pond a s a a i l i n g s impoundment a r e a on S c h e d u l e 2 f h e R e g u l a t i o n s . Hi s a f -

f i d a v i t o u t l i n e s t h e key t e p s t h a t were e q u i r e d i n o r d e r t o h a v e Sandy Pond i s t e d a s a a i l i n g s impoundment r e a on c h e d u l e

2 f h e R e g u l a t i o n s . Those t e p s i n c l u d e d c o n s u l t a t i o n s w i t h t h e p u b l i c .

C O 2013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 6 I O2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 011 FC 58

15 Vale f i l e d t h e a f f i d a v i t s of Mr. Do n S t e v e n s and Ms. a r g a r e t t e L i v i e i n s u p p o r t of t s motion t o p a r t i c i p a t e a s a re -

spondent r a s an n t e r v e n e r . Mr. t e v e n s s t h e G e n e r a l Manager of h e Long Harbour r o c e s s i n g P l a n t h a t s o p e r a t e d by Vale

Inco Newfoundland and Labrador L i m i t e d , a w h o l l y owned s u b s i d i a r y of a l e .

16 I n h i s a f f i d a v i t he t a t e d t h a t he was aware of h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s r e l a t i v e t o V a l e ' s r e q u e s t o add Sandy Pond o S c h e d u l e

2 f h e R e g u l a t i o n s and t h a t he was aware of h e c h a l l e n g e b r o u g h t by t h e A p p l i c a n t a g a i n s t t h e i n c l u s i o n of Sandy Pond n

Schedule 2 f h o s e R e g u l a t i o n s . He u r t h e r s t a t e d he b e l i e v e s t h a t Vale s a b l e t o o f f e r a u n i q u e p e r s p e c t i v e a b o u t t h e n a t u r e

and o p e r a t i o n s of a i l i n g s impoundment a r e a s , t h e i r i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e mining i n d u s t r y and t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e y c an be

e s t a b l i s h e d and o p e r a t e d i n an e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e manner.

17 Ms. i v i e i s a law c l e r k t o Counsel f o r V a l e . Th e p u r p o s e of e r a f f i d a v i t i s t o submit c e r t a i n e x h i b i t s , i n c l u d i n g a

t r a n s c r i p t of a d i o b r o a d c a s t , a copy of a b a c k g r o u n d e r document" a b o u t t h e A p p l i c a n t , documents r e l a t i n g t o t h e i n c o r p o r a -

t i o n of h e A p p l i c a n t , a r a n s c r i p t of e l e v i s i o n news t o r y and a c opy of i d e o . A l l of h e s e documents a p p e a r t o be v a i l a b l e

i n t h e p u b l i c domain and were produced b y Vale o r t h e p u r p o s e of showing t h a t t h e A p p l i c a n t s f o c u s i n g s o l e l y on t h e Long

Harbour o p e r a t i o n s and Sandy Pond t s e l f , t h a t t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n h a s a o c a l and s p e c i f i c f o c u s .

18 Mr. ordon e e l i n g s t h e P r e s i d e n t and CEO f t h e MAC. h e MAC s a a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r t h e Canadian Mining

I n d u s t r y and ha s e x i s t e d s i n c e 1935, n i t i a l l y under t h e name t h e Canadia n Metal Mining A s s o c i a t i o n " .

19 MAC e p r e s e n t s most of h e mining o p e r a t i o n s c u r r e n t l y l i s t e d i n S c h e d u l e 2 f h e R e g u l a t i o n s . MAC a y s t h e Ap -

p l i c a n t s s e e k i n g t o have S c h e d u l e 2 e c l a r e d u l t r a v i r e s t h e a u t h o r i t y of h e F i s h e r i e s A c t . At a r a g r a p h 6 f i s a f f i d a v i t , Mr .

P e e l i n g d e s c r i b e s t h e s e v e r e e f f e c t s upon 1 1 mining p r o j e c t s i n Canada i f t h e A p p l i c a n t i s s u c c e s s f u l i n i t s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r

r e v i e w . I f h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w s u c c e e d s , 1 1 mining p r o j e c t s i n Canada would be a f f e c t e d .

2 0 Mr. e e l i n g a l s o deposed t h a t t h e MAC a s been g r a n t e d i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s i n t h e s e v e r a l c a s e s d e s c r i b e d i n p a r a g r a p h 7

of i s a f f i d a v i t .

21 Mr. i e r r e G r a f t o n i s t h e P r e s i d e n t and Chief x e c u t i v e O f f i c e r of h e MABC. h e MABC as e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1901

p u r s u a n t t o an a c t of h e B r i t i s h Columbia l e g i s l a t u r e . t i s t h e dominant o i c e of h e mining n d u s t r y i n B r i t i s h Co l um b i a and

r e p r e s e n t s 4 9 m e m b e r companies w h o r e engaged n m e t a l and o a l mining n B r i t i s h Columbia and h r o u g h o u t t h e w o r l d . The

MABC as been g r a n t e d i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s i n t h o s e c a s e s s e t o u t i n p a r a g r a p h 6 f i s a f f i d a v i t . Mr. r a f t o n a l s o comments on

t h e s e v e r e consequences o r t h e mining n d u s t r y s h o u l d t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w s u c c e e d .

2 2 As t a t e d above, a l e ,MAC nd MABC e e k t o i n t e r v e n e i n t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w w i t h t h e f u l l r i g h t s of

r e s p o n d e n t s , and a l t e r n a t i v e l y , t h e y r e q u e s t t h a t t h e y be added a s p a r t i e s .

23 Th e A p p l i c a n t , b y e t t e r d a t e d August 6, 2010, n d i c a t e d t h at i t was p r e p a r e d t o c o n s e n t t o t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n of h e

Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s on a l i m i t e d b a s i s , a s f o l l o w s :

( i ) That h e i n t e r v e n e r s be r e s t r i c t e d t o one more a f f i d a v i t .

O 013 Thomson R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . G o v t . Works



Page 7 /


( i i ) That h e i n t e r v e n e r s would n o t s e e k any c o s t s from t h e A p p l i c a n t w h a t s o e v e r f o r t h e whole of h e f u l l A p p l i c a t i o n .

( i i i ) That h e normal r o c e d u r e s r e s p e c t i n g c r o s s e x a m i n a t i o n e t c a r e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e p a r t i e s b u t t h a t no u r t h e r m o t i o n s c a n

be b r o u g h t on b y any p a r t y w i t h o u t l e a v e of h e C o u r t .

2 4 T h i s p r o p o s a l w a s n o t a c c e p t e d by h e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s .

25 I w i l l f i r s t a d d r e s s t h e motion o r i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s . Rule ] 9 o v e r n s i n t e r v e n t i o n and p r o v i d e s a s f o l l o w s :

Leave t o i n t e r v e n e

1 0 9 .(1) h e Court ma y , on m o t i o n , g r a n t l e a v e t o any p e r s o n t o i n t e r v e n e i n a p r o c e e d i n g .

Contents of o t i c e of motion

(2) o t i c e of motion under u b s e c t i o n(1) h a l l

(a ) e t o u t t h e f u l l n a m e and a d d r e s s of h e p r o p o s e d i n t e r v e n e r and of ny o l i c i t o r a c t i n g f o r t h e p r o p o s e d i n t e r v e n e r ;

and

(b) e s c r i b e h o w h e p r o p o s e d i n t e r v e n e r w i s h e s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g and h o w t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l a s s i s t

t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n of a a c t u a l o r l e g a l i s s u e r e l a t e d t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g .

D i r e c t i o n s

(3) n g r a n t i n g a motion under u b s e c t i o n 1 ) , t h e Court h a l l g i v e d i r e c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g

(a ) h e s e r v i c e of ocuments; and

(b) h e r o l e of h e i n t e r v e n e r , i n c l u d i n g c o s t s , r i g h t s of p p e a l and any o t h e r m a t t e r s r e l a t i n g t o t h e p r o c e d u r e t o be

f o l l o w e d by h e i n t e r v e n e r .

A u t o r i s a t i o n d ' i n t e r v e n i r

1 0 9 .(1) a Cour p e u t , s u r r e q u e t e , a u t o r i s e r t o u t e p e r s o n n e i n t e r v e n i r dans une n s t a n c e .

Avis de r e q u e t e

(2) ' a v i s du ne e q u e t e p r e s e n t e e pour o b t e n i r 1 ' a u t o r i s a t i o n d ' i n t e r v e n i r :

O 013 T ho mso n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 8'2011 CarswellNat 294, 011 FC 58

a) r e c i s e l e s nom t a d r e s s e de a personne q ui d e s i r e i n t e r v e n i r e t ceux de son a v o c a t , e ca s ~ch~ant;

b) xplique de u e l l e mani8re a personne d e s i r e p a r t i c i p e r ~ ' i n s t a n c e e t en quoi sa a r t i c i p a t i o n a i d e r a a a p r i s e d u n e

d e c i s i o n s u r t o u t e q u e s t i o n de a i t e t de d r o i t se r a p p o r t a n t ~ ' i n s t a n c e .

Directives de a Cour

(3)La o u r s s o r t it 1 ' a u t o r i s a t i o n d ' i n t e r v e n i r de d i r e c t i v e s c o n c e r n a n t :

a) a s i g n i f i c a t i o n de documents;

b) e r o l e de ' i n t e r v e n a n t , n ota mme nt en ce q u i concerne e s depens, e s d r o i t s d ' a p p e l e t t o u t e a u t r e q u e s t i o n r e l a t i v e a

l a procedure a u i v r e .

26 I e f e r t o t h e d e c i s i o n i n Rothmans, Benson &Hedges n c . v . C anada Attorney General)~1989~f 9901 1 F.C.74 Fed.

T.D.), w h e r e th e Court e t ou t the following r i t e r i a t o be considered w h e n d e a l i n g with a motion o r i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s :

(1 ) s t h e proposed i n t e r v e n o r d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by h e outcome?

(2 ) o es h e r e e x i s t a u s t i c i a b l e i s s u e an d a e r i t a b l e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t ?

(3) s t h e r e an apparent a c k o f n y o t h e r r e a s o n a b l e or f f i c i e n t me a ns o submit he q u e s t i o n t o t h e Court?

(4 ) s t h e p o s i t i o n o f h e proposed i n t e r v e n o r a d e q u a t e l y defended by on e o f h e p a r t i e s t o t h e case?

(5 ) re th e i n t e r e s t s o f u s t i c e b e t t e r served by h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f h e proposed h i r d p a r t y ?

(6) an h e C o u r t hear an d decide h e cause o n t s m e r i t s without h e proposed n t e r v e n o r ?

27 T h e f a c t o r s a r e not cumulative and t h e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s need not meet every o n e o f h e f a c t o r s ; see Canadian

P a c i f i c Railway . Boutique Jacob n c . (2006),35 7 N.R. 38 4 F.C.A.) t p a r a s . 19- 2 1 .

28 I t i s c l e a r t h a t n e i t h e r MAC or MABC r e " d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d " because they ha ve n o d i r e c t connection with t h e u se o f

Sandy P o n d as a a i l i n g s i m p o u n d m e n t r e a . Their n t e r e s t i s a broad one, as e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f h e mining i n d u s t r y i n Canada,

g e n e r a l l y .

29 Vale a l s o argues h a t t i s not d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d " by th e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l review. t submits

t h a t i f h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w i s s u c c e s s f u l , a e c l a r a t i o n t h a t s e c t i o n 5 , e c t i o n 2 7 . 1 , an d S c h e d u l e 2 f h e Regu-

l a t i o n s a r e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l an d w i l l n o t have e t r o a c t i v e e f f e c t , meaning h a t t s e n t i t l e m e n t t o o p e r a t e a a i l i n g s impoundment

O 013 T h o m s o n R e u t e r s . No l a i m t o O r i g . G o v t . Works



Page9

2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 011 FC 58

a r e a a t Sandy Pond w i l l n o t be a f f e c t e d .

30 Having e g a r d t o t h e Supreme C o u r t of a n a d a ' s d e c i s i o n i n H i s l o p v . Can ad a A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ) , 2007 l S . C . R . 4 29

( S . C . C . ) , h e r e t r o a c t i v e e f f e c t of e c l a r a t i o n of o n s t i t u t i o n a l i n v a l i d i t y s t o be e c i d e d on acase- b y- c a s e b a s i s . I n any e v e n t ,

b a s e d on my n a l y s i s of h e r e m a i n i n g r i t e r i a , i t i s u n n e c e s s a r y t o d e t e r m i n e i f V a l e s " d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d " by h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r

j u d i c i a l r e v i e w i n o r d e r t o d i s p o s e of t s m o t i o n t o i n t e r v e n e .

31 There s a u s t i c i a b l e i s s u e r a i s e d b y h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w and a n i n t e r e s t t h a t a f f e c t s t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t .

32 C o n t r a r y t o t h e A p p l i c a n t ' s s u b m i s s i o n s on a c t o r number 4, am a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e i n t e r e s t s of h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s

m a y n o t be a d e q u a t e l y d e f e n d e d by e i t h e r t h e A p p l i c a n t o r t h e R e s p o n d e n t . T h e i n t e r e s t s of o t h t h e A p p l i c a n t and t h e Re-

s p o n d e n t a r e n o t t h e sa m e s t h o s e of h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s . While h e R e s p o n d e n t r e p r e s e n t s t h e p u b l i c n t e r e s t , h e o e s s o

on a b r o a d p l a n e and w i t h o u t an o b l i g a t i o n t o a d d r e s s t h e i n t e r e s t s of h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s .

33 I am a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e i n t e r e s t s of u s t i c e a r e b e t t e r s e r v e d by h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of h e t h r e e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s and t h a t

t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t m a y s u f f e r i f t h o s e t h r e e p a r t i e s a r e d e n i e d t h e r i g h t t o p a r t i c i p a t e , a l b e i t on a l i m i t e d b a s i s , i n t h i s p r o -

c e e d i n g .

34 F i n a l l y , a v i n g r e g a r d t o t h e s i x t h f a c t o r , n my p i n i o n t h e C o u r t w i l l be s s i s t e d i n a d j u d i c a t i n g t h e p r e s e n t a p p l i c a t i o n

f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w , b y t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of h e t h r e e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s . T h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s c a n o f f e r r e l e v a n t and

d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s on t h e u n d e r l y i n g a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w . T h e i r i n t e r e s t s n o t m e r e l y u r i s p r u d e n t i a l , a s was h e

c a s e i n Cana da Prime M i n i s t e r ) . Khadr, 009 FCA 186 F . C . A . ) .

35 As h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s h a v e s a t i s f i e d a number of h e c r i t e r i a s e t o u t i n Rothmans, B e n s o n & H e d g e s n c . , t h i s

m o t i o n t o i n t e r v e n e w i l l be g r a n t e d .

36 Rule 1 0 9 ( 3 ) p r o v i d e s t h a t i n g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n t o i n t e r v e n e , t h e C o u r t s h a l l g i v e d i r e c t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e s e r v i c e of

documents and t h e r o l e of h e i n t e r v e n e r , i n c l u d i n g c o s t s , r i g h t s of p p e a l and any o t h e r r e l e v a n t m a t t e r s c o n c e r n i n g t h e p r o -

c e d u r e t o b e o l l o w e d b y h e i n t e r v e n e r .

37 T h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s s e e k t o p a r t i c i p a t e on a e r y b r o a d b a s i s , i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t t o make m o t i o n s and t o a p p e a l

any and l l o r d e r s t h a t m a y s s u e on an i n t e r l o c u t o r y b a s i s . T h i s d e g r ee of a r t i c i p a t i o n i s more c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e r o l e of a

p a r t y , n o t a s i n t e r v e n e r s . T h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s s e e k s t a t u s a s a r e s p o n d e n t , a s an a l t e r n a t i v e t o o b t a i n i n g s t a t u s a s i n t e r -

v e n e r s .

38 I n r e s p o n s e t o a D i r e c t i o n i s s u ed a f t e r t h e h e a r i n g of h e m o t i o n s , t h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s were a s k e d t o make s u b -

m i s s i o n s a s t o t h e D i r e c t i o n t h a t t h e C o u r t s h o u l d i s s u e , a s r e q u i r e d b y R u l e 1 0 9 , i f i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s i s g r a n t e d . T o a l a r g e

d e g r e e , t h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s r e s p o n d e d by a g a i n r e q u e s t i n g a b r o a d p a r t i c i p a t o r y r o l e , e c h o i n g what h e y h ad s e t o u t i n

t h e i r N o t i c e s of o t i o n .

39 I n o t h e r w o r d s , a l t h o u g h t h e y r e q u e s t a r o l e a s " i n t e r v e n e r s " , t h e P r o p o s e d I n t e r v e n e r s want o c o n d u c t t h e m s e l v e s as

O 013 T h om son R e u t e r s . No l a i m t o O r i g . G o v t . Works



Page 10 ~ f

2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 011 FC 58

p a r t i e s , i n t h i s c a s e a s r e s p o n d e n t s .

4 0 I am o t p r e p a r e d t o i s s u e t h e D i r e c t i o n s a s s o u g h t by t h e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s . I f t h e Proposed n t e r v e n e r s had s u b -

m i t t e d e v i d e n c e t o s h o w h a t t h e y s h o u l d be r a n t e d p a r t y s t a t u s , a a s i s would x i s t f o r t h e e x e r c i s e of i s c r e t i o n t o a l l o w themt o p a r t i c i p a t e a s r e s p o n d e n t s . No i r e c t i o n s would be r e q u i r e d b e c a u s e t h e Rules g u i d e t h e manner n which p a r t i e s can p a r -

t i c i p a t e i n an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w . I n o t e t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o s u b s e c t i o n 1 8 . 1 ( 1 ) of h e Federal o u r t s A c t , R . S . C . 1985,

c . F-7 and Rule 303(1) of h e R u l e s , a key c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a r e s p o n d e n t " t o an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w i s t h a t such

p e r s o n be d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d " by h e s u b j e c t of h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w .

41 I t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y f o r me o comment o n w h e t h e r an y o r a l l of h e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s a r e " d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d " by t h e

s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w . I am a t i s f i e d t h a t h a v i n g r e g a r d t o t h e e v i d e n c e s u b m i t t e d and h e r e l e v a n t

j u r i s p r u d e n c e p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e g r a n t i n g of n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s , t h a t t h e t h r e e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s s h o u l d be p e r m i t t e d t o p a r -

t i c i p a t e i n t h a t c a p a c i t y , t h a t i s a s i n t e r v e n e r s . Th e r o l e of n n t e r v e n e r i s n e c e s s a r i l y mo r e l i m i t e d t h a n t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of a

r e s p o n d e n t wh o n j o y s a l l r i g h t s of a r t y . The i r e c t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e r o l e of h e s e Proposed n t e r v e n e r s , a s i n t e r v e n e r s , w i l l

r e f l e c t t h a t mo r e l i m i t e d r o l e .

42 As n d i c a t e d , i n r e s p o n s e t o a r e q u e s t from t h e C o u r t , t h e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s made s u b m i s s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e D i -

r e c t i o n s t h a t s h o u l d i s s u e i n r e s p e c t of h e i r s t a t u s a s i n t e r v e n e r s .

4 3 Th e Proposed I n t e r v e n e r s have made t c l e a r t h a t t h e y w i l l n o t be s e e k i n g c o s t s i n t h i s m a t t e r . There s an o b v i o u s

concern about a i g h t of p p e a l .

4 4 O r d i n a r i l y , an n t e r v e n e r has no i g h t of p p e a l ; s e e Edmonton F r i e n d s o f h e North Environmental o c i e t y v . Canada

( M i n i s t e r o f W e s t e r n Economic D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n ) (1990), 1 9 9 1 1 1 . F . C . 416 (Fed. C . A . ) . I n C h r e t i e n v . Canada ( A t t o r n e y

General) 2005, 7 3 . ' I" . R . 219 En~~ F . C . ) , P r o t h o n o t a r y A r o n o v i t c h a d d r e s s e d t h e i s s u e of a i g h t of p p e a l f o r an i n t e r -

v e n e r , a t p a r a s . 41 and 42 s f o l l o w s :

[41 O r d i n a r i l y an n t e r v e n e r i s n o t g r a n t e d t h e r i g h t t o p u r s u e an a p p e a l s h o u l d t h e d e c i s i o n i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g i n which t i s

i n t e r v e n i n g be c o n t r a r y t o i t s i n t e r e s t s .

[42] On e of h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r i n t e r v e n e r s ought o be g r a n t e d a i g h t of p p e a l i s whether h e r e i s

an x p e c t a t i o n t h a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t would have any i t a l i n t e r e s t o r m o t i v a t i o n t o p r o s e c u t e an p p e a l w i t h t h e same i g o r a s

t h e i n t e r v e n i n g p a r t i e s would d o . Then, h e a p p e a l i s g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d t o t h e i s s u e s which h e i n t e r v e n e r wa s i v e n l e a v e t o

a d d r e s s below.

[ r e f e r e n c e s o m i t t e d ]

4 5 In h e p r e s en t c a s e , t seems o me h a t a i g h t of p p e a l f o r t h e Proposed n t e r v e n e r s w i l l be of o n c e r n o n l y i n t h e e v e n t

t h a t t h e j u d i c i a l r e v i e w a p p l i c a t i o n i s g r a n t e d w i t h r e t r o a c t i v e e f f e c t . That i t u a t i o n would e r t a i n l y be of r e a t c o n c e r n t o V a l e .

The o t e n t i a l d i f f i c u l t y i n t h a t r e g a r d m a y be a d d r e s s e d by h e Proposed n t e r v e n e r s s e e k i n g l e a v e t o a p p e a l from t h e h e a r i n g s

judge u p o n h e h e a r i n g of h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w . The Proposed n t e r v e n e r s w i l l a d d r e s s t h a t i s s u e i n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e

O 013 T h o m s o n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . G o v t . Works



Page 11 ~ f

2011 CarswellNat 294, 01 1 FC 58

a p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d s .

46 Having e g a r d t o t h e submissions made b y h e p a r t i e s and h e r e l e v a n t u r i s p r u d e n c e , am a t i s f i e d t h a t Vale, an dMAC

and MABC o i n t l y , should b e r a n t e d i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g an d h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n s h a l l proceed o n h e f o l l o w i n g

b a s i s :

( i ) documents w i l l b e e r v e d u p o n Counsel o r t h e A p p l i c a n t and Respondent, e s p e c t i v e l y , w i t h i n 60 ays f t e r r e c e i p t o f

t h i s Order;

( i i ) Vale may le an p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d , n c l u d i n g s u p p o r t i n g a f f i d a v i t s from o ne m o re a c t w i t n e s s and o ne x p e r t w i t n e s s ,

i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e a f f i d a v i t s f i l e d t o d a t e ;

( i i i )MAC nd MABC, o i n t l y , may i l e an a p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d , i n c l u d i n g s u p p o r t i n g a f f i d a v i t s from o ne a c t w i t n e s s and

o ne e x p e r t w i t n e s s , i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e a f f i d a v i t s f i l e d t o d a t e ;

(iv) h e i n t e r v e n e r s s h a l l no t have t h e r i g h t t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n c r o s s examination of h e deponents o r t h e A p p l i c a n t an d h e

Respondent, n l e s s t h e r e i s consent from b o t h t h e A p p l i c a n t and h e Respondent n t h a t r e g a r d ;

( v) al e w i l l b e e r m i t t e d t o b r i n g e v i d e n c e an d m ake arguments o n h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

a . t h e use o f andy Po nd s a a i l i n g s impoundment r e a i s an exampl e o f r o j e c t t h a t i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e purpose

o f h e F i s h e r i e s A c t ;

b. how andy Po nd c a m e o b e chosen a s a a i l i n g s impoundment r e a ;

c . how t w as decided h a t t h e R e g u l a t i o n s w o u ld apply o t h e use o f andy Po nd a s a a i l i n g s im p o u nd ment r e a an d

why t w as decided h a t Vale should seek an amendment o t h e R e g u l a t i o n s ;

d . t h e n a t u r e and e x t e n t o f h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l a s s e s s m e n t s and p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n conducted b y Vale i n r e s p e c t of

Sandy Pond; and

e . f u l l p a r t i c u l a r s o f h e Compensation Plan develop ed b y Vale and w h y t a p p r o p r i a t e l y compensates o r t h e use o f

Sandy Po nd a s a a i l i n g s im p o u nd ment r e a ;

(vi)MAC nd MABC, o i n t l y , w i l l b e p e r m i t t e d t o b r i n g e v i d e n c e and make arguments o n h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

a . t h e h i s t o r y o f h e mining p r a c t i c e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o e f f l u e n t , and h e e v o l u t i o n o f t a n d a r d s over i m e ;

b . t h e need f o r and n a t u r e o f a i l i n g s an d t h e body o f e s e a r c h an d e v o l u t i o n o f e s t management r a c t i c e developed

through t h e Mine Environment N e u t r a l Drainage(MEND) rogram an d t h e MAC owards S u s t a i n a b l e Mining

D 01 3 T h o m s o n R e u t e r s . No laim o O r i g . Govt. Wo rk s



Page 12 1 I2011 C a r s w e l l N a t 294, 011 FC 58

(TSM) n i t i a t i v e ;

c . t h e n a t u r e of i s h p o p u l a t i o n s i n w a t e r b o d i e s w i t h i n Canada, and t h e A p p l i c a n t ' s p o s i t i o n t h a t i n d i v i d u a l p o p u l a -

t i o n s a r e g e n e r a l l y u n i q u e i n any m a t e r i a l r e s p e c t ; and

d . t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y from a s a f e t y and e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n p e r s p e c t i v e of s a g e of a t u r a l w a t e r body v e r s u s an

a r t i f i c i a l s t r u c t u r e ;

( v i i ) h e i n t e r v e n e r s m a y r e s e n t o r a l argument u b j e c t t o f u r t h e r D i r e c t i o n s from t h e h e a ri n g s u d g e ;

( v i i i ) t h e i n t e r v e n e r s s h a l l n o t be e n t i t l e d t o b r i n g i n t e r l o c u t o r y m o t i o n s ;

( i x ) h e i n t e r v e n e r s w i l l have no i g h t t o a p p e a l any n t e r l o c u t o r y o r d e r s m ade n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g ;

(x) h e i n t e r v e n e r s m a y s k t h e p r e s i d i n g judge upon h e h e a r i n g of h i s a p p l i c a t i o n t o e n t e r t a i n a motion o r t h e i n t e r v e n e r s

t o have t h e r i g h t t o a p p e a l from t h e f i n a l judgment i s p o s i n g of h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r u d i c i a l r e v i e w ;

( x i ) h e i n t e r v e n e r s s h a l l n o t be n t i t l e d t o s e e k c o s t s a g a i n s t t h e A p p l i c a n t o r t h e Responden t nor h a l l t h e A p p l i c a n t o r t h e

Respondent be e n t i t l e d t o s e e k c o s t s a g a i n s t t h e i n t e r v e n e r s w h a t s o e v e r f o r t h e whole of h i s p r o c e e d i n g .

4 7 There s h a l l be no o s t s t o any a r t y upon t h e p r e s e n t m o t i o n s .

Orde r

THISCOURTORDERS h a t . •

1 . T h e motions a r e g r a n t e d , Vale n c o L t d .(Vale" ) , t h e Mining A s s o c i a t i o n of Canada(MAC") nd t h e Mining Asso-

c i a t i o n of r i t i s h Columbia(MBAC" ) r e g r a n t e d i n t e r v e n e r s t a t u s upon t h e f o l l o w i n g b a s i s :

( i ) documents w i l l be s e r v e d upon Counsel o r t h e A p p l i c a n t and R e s p o n d e n t , r e s p e c t i v e l y , w i t h i n 60 d a y s a f t e r r e -

c e i p t of h i s O r d e r ;

( i i ) Vale m a y i l e an a p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d , i n c l u d i n g s u p p o r t i n g a f f i d a v i t s from one more f a c t w i t n e s s and one e x p e r t

w i t n e s s , n a d d i t i o n t o t h e a f f i d a v i t s f i l ed t o d a t e ;

( i i i ) MAC nd MABC, o i n t l y , m a y i l e an a p p l i c a t i o n r e c o r d , n c l u d i n g s u p p o r t i n g a f f i d a v i t s from one f a c t w i t n e s s

and on e e x p e r t w i t n e s s , n a d d i t i o n t o t h e a f f i d a v i t s f i l e d t o d a t e ;

( i v ) h e i n t e r v e n e r s s h a l l n o t have t h e r i g h t t o p a r ti c i p a t e i n c r o s s e x a m i n a t i o n of h e d e p o n e n t s f o r t h e A p p l i c a n t and

t h e Respondent, n l e s s t h e r e i s c o n s e n t from b o t h t h e A p p l i c a n t and t h e Respondent n t h a t r e g a r d ;

D 013 Thoms on R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . Govt. Works



Page 13 I 12011 CarswellNat 294, 011 FC 58

(v) ale w i l l be p e r m i t t e d t o b r i n g e v i d e n c e and make arguments on h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

a . t h e u s e of Sandy Pond a s a t a i l i n g s impoundment a r e a i s an example of a p r o j e c t t h a t i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e

p u r p o s e of h e F i s h e r i e s A c t ;

b . ho w Sandy Pond came o be c h o s e n a s a a i l i n g s impoundment r e a ;

c . ho w t w as e c i d e d t h a t t h e R e g u l a t i o n s would a p p l y t o t h e u s e of andy Pond a s a a i l i n g s impoundment r e a

and w hy t w as e c i d e d t h a t Vale h o u l d s e e k an amendment o t h e R e g u l a t i o n s ;

d . t h e n a t u r e and x t e n t of h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l a s s e s s m e n t s and u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n c o n d u c t e d by Vale n r e s p e c t of

Sandy Pond; and

e . f u l l p a r t i c u l a r s of h e Compensation P l a n d e v e l o p e d by Vale and w hy t a p p r o p r i a t e l y compensates o r t h e u s e

of andy Pond a s a a i l i n g s impoundment r e a ;

( v i )MAC nd MABC, o i n t l y , w i l l be p e r m i t t e d t o b r i n g e v i d e n c e and make r g u m e n t s on h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

a . t h e h i s t o r y of h e mining p r a c t i c e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o e f f l u e n t , and h e e v o l u t i o n of t a n d a r d s o v e r t i m e ;

b . t h e need f o r and n a t u r e of a i l i n g s and t h e body of e s e a r c h and e v o l u t i o n of e s t management p r a c t i c e d e -

v e l o p e d t h r o u g h t h e Mi ne Environment e u t r a l D r a i n a g e(MEND) rogram and h e MAC owards u s t a i n a b l e

Mining(TSM) n i t i a t i v e ;

c . t h e n a t u r e of i s h p o p u l a t i o n s i n w a t e r b o d i e s w i t h i n Canada, and t h e A p p l i c a n t ' s p o s i t i on t h a t i n d i v i d u a l

p o p u l a t i o n s a r e g e n e r a l l y u n i q u e i n any m a t e r i a l r e s p e c t ; and

d . h e d e s i r a b i l i t y from a a f e t y and e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n p e r s p e c t i v e of s a g e of a t u r a l w a t e r body v e r s u s an

a r t i f i c i a l s t r u c t u r e ;

( v i i ) t h e i n t e r v e n e r s ma y r e s e n t o r a l argument u b j e c t t o f u r t h e r D i r e c t i o n s from t h e h e a r i n g s j u d g e ;

( v i i i ) t h e i n t e r v e n e r s s h a l l n o t be e n t i t l e d t o b r i n g i n t e r l o c u t o r y m o t i o n s ;

( i x ) h e i n t e r v e n e r s w i l l have no i g h t t o a p p e a l any n t e r l o c u t o r y o r d e r s made n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g ;

(x) h e i n t e r v e n e r s ma y ask t h e p r e s i d i n g judge upon t h e h e a r i n g of h i s a p p l i c a t i o n t o e n t e r t a i n a motion f o r t h e

i n t e r v e n e r s t o have h e r i g h t t o a p p e a l from h e f i n a l judgment i s p o s i n g of h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w ;




Page 14 ('


(xi) h e i n t e r v e n e r s s h a l l not be n t i t l e d t o seek o s t s a g a i n s t t h e A p p l i c a n t or h e Respondent or h a l l t h e A p p l i c a n t o r

t h e Respondent be e n t i t l e d t o seek o s t s a g a i n s t t h e i n t e r v e n e r s whatsoever o r t h e who le o f h i s p r o c e e d i n g .

2. Th e t y l e o f ause i s amended a s f o l l o w s :

SANDYPONDALLIANCETOPROTECT

CANADIANWATERS N C .

an d

HERMAJESTYTHEQUEEN N RIGHTOF

CANADAASREPRESENTEDBYTHE

ATTORNEYGENERAL

and

VALEINCO TD.,MINING ASSOCIATION

OFCANADA ANDMINING ASSOCIATIONOF

BRITISHCOLUMBIA

3 . There s h a l l be n o o r d e r a s t o c o s t s f o r an y p a r t y o r an y i n t e r v e n e r upo n t h e s e m o t i o n s .

ENDOFDOCUMENT

D 013 Tho mso n R e u t e r s . No laim t o O r i g . G o vt. Wo rk s

A p p l i c a n t

Respondent

I n t e r v e n e r s

Motion r a n t e d .



Court F i l e No.: A-394-12

and A-395-12

BETWEEN:

RICHARDWARMAN nd

NATIONALPOST COMPANY

Appellants

~Tir!

MARK FOURNIER and

CONSTANCE FOURNIER

Respondents

RESPONDING MOTION RECORD OF THE

APPELLANT, NATIONALPOST COMPANY

(Motion for leave to intervene,

to be heard i n writing)

( F i l e d t h i s 13th day of May, 2013)

Documents

Responding Motion Record of National Post May 13 13