Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...
Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ... Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...
Page: 196 [766] Considering the evidence presented, the Defendant has not discharged its burden on the balance of probabilities of proving that there are policy reasons why a duty of care should not be imposed. (a) Bad Faith 2010 FC 495 (CanLII) [767] As I noted above, Justice Cory in Just, at para. 29, held that the policy decisions which can exempt the Government from a duty of care must be made bona fide. I have found that the conduct in question in this case was operational and not policy based. I also conclude that there was an absence of bona fides in this conduct as well. [768] Throughout the summer of 1998, the Department could not adequately permit a supply of timber to the forestry industry. I find that this inability was the result of the misconduct of DIAND’s employees. One example of dubious conduct is found in the email sent by Mr. Kennedy to Mr. Fillmore, on May 25, 1998. This email was entered as Exhibit P-79, Tab 70. Mr. Kennedy reported to Mr. Fillmore, his supervisor and Regional Manager Forest Resources, that: On May 17 a letter was sent to the districts advising them of the areas permit applications would be accepted. Since that time three new Wood Supply lists have appeared on the scene. The only way I received a copy of this moving target of Forest Practises is by receiving what is said to be the latest copy from you this afternoon. This system of information flow is not acceptable to the be responsible for accepting and approving areas for permits. The fact that the wood supply areas so drastically change in a week period causes me to believe that we really are guessing at the wood supply and at best did not prepare for the areas before my letter of May 15, 1998. I can not believe the attitude that is being taken towards the
Page: 197 industry need, promises made publicly, and total lack of involvement of key players in the process. (Emphasis added) … The latest paper shows Rancheria wood but at 1pm today we finally realized that the wood was not there – so we now have a plan along Campbell hiway. … 2010 FC 495 (CanLII) We have not kept our word to industry, we are in panic stage now selecting wood on the fly. I checked with Ken and Peter, key players in the process of wood supply and they were not aware of the latest Wood Supply Summary. We need a meeting to sort this mess out. The constantly moving wood supply areas makes it impossible to accept applications in an orderly manner and be credible. Shirley and I have now in the last week used three different official lists from Harvest Practises to accept applications. [769] Mr. Kennedy, apparently not satisfied with the result of his email of May 25 th , sent a confidential handwritten memorandum to Ms. Guscott on June 2 nd . This document was entered as Exhibit P-79, Tab 71. Mr. Kennedy in evident disquiet over the conduct of his co-workers expressed the following concerns: We, in Forest Resources, and I say we, with little pride, in the lack of team work exibited to meet our set objectives of wood supply, have not met promises made internally to yourself, or publically to industry. Our commitment to issue 1000 m 3 and under in April is two months late. The promise to have wood ready for harvest, to the TSA, for June is frankly a dream unless a co-ordinated, urgent effort is made to do so. After a wood supply briefing yesterday, and a legal briefing today on financing and pre screening, consultation obligations, it is my belief that we have not met our mandate. I have as of Satuday approved the 1000 m 3 and under applications in all districts except in Y02 & Y03, because no wood was provided until yesterday in those units. I could not provide the 20% Limit in Y04 as Harvest Practices did not do any layout in this FMU…The
- Page 145 and 146: Page: 145 of action arising in that
- Page 147 and 148: Page: 147 [577] In responding to th
- Page 149 and 150: Page: 149 The plaintiff shall serve
- Page 151 and 152: Page: 151 20 For the reasons expres
- Page 153 and 154: Page: 153 [598] Both the Plaintiffs
- Page 155 and 156: Page: 155 … Liability for acts of
- Page 157 and 158: Page: 157 from the evidence, and if
- Page 159 and 160: Page: 159 [616] Mr. Gurney is an un
- Page 161 and 162: Page: 161 Q. Did you understand the
- Page 163 and 164: Page: 163 [633] Mr. Madill was anot
- Page 165 and 166: Page: 165 [643] Having regard to th
- Page 167 and 168: Page: 167 [653] In Design Services
- Page 169 and 170: Page: 169 [660] In Childs v. Desorm
- Page 171 and 172: Page: 171 [668] This reliance by th
- Page 173 and 174: Page: 173 [674] Similarly, the Defe
- Page 175 and 176: Page: 175 we would be interested in
- Page 177 and 178: Page: 177 happy with this decision)
- Page 179 and 180: Page: 179 [703] This high unemploym
- Page 181 and 182: Page: 181 [711] I also note that th
- Page 183 and 184: Page: 183 [718] This is not the cas
- Page 185 and 186: Page: 185 [726] In my opinion, the
- Page 187 and 188: Page: 187 [732] Similarly, Mr. Loek
- Page 189 and 190: Page: 189 [741] There is no doubt t
- Page 191 and 192: Page: 191 Department employed a loc
- Page 193 and 194: Page: 193 duty of care and that the
- Page 195: Page: 195 inordinate delay, that in
- Page 199 and 200: Page: 199 … Industry is not stupi
- Page 201 and 202: Page: 201 offered by Mr. Fillmore i
- Page 203 and 204: Page: 203 • Uncertainties associa
- Page 205 and 206: Page: 205 available sustainable tim
- Page 207 and 208: Page: 207 [787] On August 9, 2000,
- Page 209 and 210: Page: 209 [796] On the basis of the
- Page 211 and 212: Page: 211 [805] In preparation for
- Page 213 and 214: Page: 213 [810] This is an extraord
- Page 215 and 216: Page: 215 inferences, to be sure, c
- Page 217 and 218: Page: 217 occurrences but occurred
- Page 219 and 220: Page: 219 [831] Of particular impor
- Page 221 and 222: Page: 221 [840] Mr. Madill appeared
- Page 223 and 224: Page: 223 evidence of the Defendant
- Page 225 and 226: Page: 225 an inference of causation
- Page 227 and 228: Page: 227 [860] The Defendant drew
- Page 229 and 230: Page: 229 [869] This conduct, inclu
- Page 231 and 232: Page: 231 [878] In the result, I fi
- Page 233 and 234: Page: 233 [887] Unfortunately, for
- Page 235 and 236: Page: 235 [897] As I understand the
- Page 237 and 238: Page: 237 [905] Throughout 1998, th
- Page 239 and 240: Page: 239 James Moore. That meeting
- Page 241 and 242: Page: 241 391605 B.C. Ltd. was give
- Page 243 and 244: Page: 243 (3) The representor must
- Page 245 and 246: Page: 245 [932] For the reasons not
Page: 197<br />
industry need, promises made publicly, and total lack of involvement<br />
of key players in the process.<br />
(Emphasis added)<br />
…<br />
The latest paper shows Rancheria wood but at 1pm today we finally<br />
realized that the wood was not there – so we now have a plan along<br />
Campbell hiway.<br />
…<br />
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)<br />
We have not kept our word to industry, we are in panic stage now<br />
selecting wood on the fly. I checked with Ken and Peter, key players<br />
in the process of wood supply and they were not aware of the latest<br />
Wood Supply Summary. We need a meeting to sort this mess out.<br />
The constantly moving wood supply areas makes it impossible to<br />
accept applications in an orderly manner and be credible. Shirley and<br />
I have now in the last week used three different official lists from<br />
Harvest Practises to accept applications.<br />
[769] Mr. Kennedy, apparently not satisfied with the result of his email of May 25 th , sent a<br />
confidential handwritten memorandum to Ms. Guscott on June 2 nd . This document was entered as<br />
Exhibit P-79, Tab 71. Mr. Kennedy in evident disquiet over the conduct of his co-workers expressed<br />
the following concerns:<br />
We, in Forest Resources, and I say we, with little pride, in the lack of<br />
team work exibited to meet our set objectives of wood supply, have<br />
not met promises made internally to yourself, or publically to<br />
industry. Our commitment to issue 1000 m 3 and under in April is two<br />
months late. The promise to have wood ready for harvest, to the<br />
TSA, for June is frankly a dream unless a co-ordinated, urgent effort<br />
is made to do so. After a wood supply briefing yesterday, and a legal<br />
briefing today on financing and pre screening, consultation<br />
obligations, it is my belief that we have not met our mandate.<br />
I have as of Satuday approved the 1000 m 3 and under applications in<br />
all districts except in Y02 & Y03, because no wood was provided<br />
until yesterday in those units. I could not provide the 20% Limit in<br />
Y04 as Harvest Practices did not do any layout in this FMU…The
Change language