Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 194
A. Absolutely, yes, My Lady.
[758] It is clear that the issuance of a CTP was simply an administrative act and I so find.
[759] I also refer to the email from Mr. Moore to Ms. Clark, dated January 4, 2000, entered as
Exhibit D-81, Tab 166. In this email, Mr. Moore was responding to SYFC’s concerns that delayed
CTPs would result in a one month shortfall of timber for the mill. Mr. Moore stated that there were
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
“[l]imits to what can be done with the bounds of good program management and sound policy
implementation.” (Emphasis added)
[760] I find that the negligent issuance of CTPs was an administrative act or the implementation of
policy. The decision to implement policy is operational in nature. The Defendant is not immune
from a finding that a duty of care exists, for the manner in which her policies were implemented.
[761] According to the decision of the Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Court of
Appeal in Atlantic Leasing Ltd. v. Newfoundland (1998), 164 Nfld & P.E.I.R. 119 (Nfld. C.A.),
inordinate delay cannot be a policy. In that case, the Court found that the Government of
Newfoundland was liable to the plaintiff for its inordinate delay relative to renewal of a commercial
lease for office space.
[762] I adopt the finding of the Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, that
there can be no policy of inordinate delay. Insofar as the Plaintiffs complain of the Defendant’s