Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 231
[878] In the result, I find that but for the Defendant’s cumulative negligence in failing to
adequately issue CTPs, the Plaintiff would not have been forced to close the mill and the
expectation losses would not have occurred.
[879] It has also been established on the balance of probabilities that the Defendant was negligent
through the inordinate delay in completing a process for long-term access to timber.
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
[880] The Plaintiffs have proven that an adequate supply of timber was essential to the continued
financing and operation of the mill. By August 2000, it was clear that the end of the process to apply
for long-term tenure was not in sight. In reality, the first steps to this process were taken in 1995. By
2000, when the Plaintiffs finally “threw in the towel”, the Department was still floundering through
the development of a process. It was also evident that the problems in obtaining adequate shortterm
timber were going to continue.
[881] It is important to keep in mind the fact that THAs were nothing new to the Department and
that the Department had issued a 75,000 m 3 THA to LFN in approximately six months.
[882] As I understand the Defendant’s conduct of the case and submissions, she argued that
granting a THA is a discretionary decision. There was no guarantee that the Plaintiffs would be the
successful candidate of any RFP. She concludes by submitting that causation cannot be established.