Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 230
find that this was adequately explained in Mr. Van Leeuwen’s evidence at trial. On the basis of the
evidence, I find that the mill was appropriate for milling Yukon timber.
[874] However, the fact that 215,000 m 3 of timber was delivered to the mill shows that the
Plaintiffs had adequate contracts with loggers for a sufficient supply of timber. The inadequacies of
that supply, with respect to profile, I attribute to DIAND’s negligence in issuing CTPs.
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
[875] As well, I refer to the recommendation that was made under the Regional Partnership Fund
& Major Business Projects, entered at Exhibit P-79, Tab 334. In this recommendation, signed by
Ms. Guscott, the mill was “considered to be medium to high risk due depending on ability to obtain
adequate forest tenure to meet market demand.” This was the only risk identified in recommending
the investment of $5.5 million dollars.
[876] The Defendant had exclusive control of the forest. The Defendant’s documentary evidence
and representative witness, Mr. Sewell, accepted that the only risk was getting adequate forest
tenure. In my opinion, the Defendant was the cause of the mill shutdown.
[877] The Defendant claims that other factors may have also contributed to the shutdown of the
mill. This is not supported by the evidence. Nevertheless, as I have discussed above, it is sufficient
that the Defendant be a cause. I accept that the mill shut down because of inadequate timber supply.
I find that this shutdown was in whole or in part caused by the negligence of the Defendant. `