Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 222
[844] As in Brewer Bros., the cumulative conduct of the Defendant’s servants fell below the
standard of care of a reasonably competent public servant. I find that the Defendant was negligent.
[845] I also find that the failure of the Department to develop a process for accessing long-term
supplies of timber was due to inordinate delay. As has been established by the evidence, including
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
the documentary evidence produced by the Defendant, there was an inordinate delay in the
implementation of the policy.
[846] Time after time, the Defendant’s servants and agents said to the Plaintiffs and others that the
implementation of long-term tenure required a FMP and that the first thing to be done in introducing
a FMP was the completion of an up-to-date inventory. In 1997, the Minister indicated that the
timeline for completion of a FMP was two to three years.
[847] The discussion of long-term tenure with LPL began in 1996. The timeline for issuance of
THAs, as presented to the Plaintiffs in 1999, was April 2000. The timelines were continually
delayed. By August 2000, when the mill closed, the Department had not finalized the administrative
process which would commence the application for a THA. By November 2001, when this action
commenced, no THA had yet been issued.
[848] That inventory was not commissioned until January 2000 and even as of the date of the trial,
no FMP was in place for southeast Yukon. A FMP had been created in 1991 but according to the