Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 299
adequate supply of timber is not necessarily limited to one specific geographic region within FMUs
Y02 and Y03.
[1133] The Defendant also alleges that numerous matters, which are properly business decisions of
the Plaintiffs, were essential terms. She submits that there could be no contract unless there were
settled terms as to the equipment to be used, the phases, timing and financing of the mill project,
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
and the benefits of cogeneration. I find that these issues are all business decisions that solely rest
with the Plaintiffs. These terms were not necessary in order to find a contract between the Plaintiffs
and the Defendant.
[1134] The Defendant’s argument is contrary to the evidence in the record. The Defendant’s
documentary evidence and the testimony of her witnesses show that the Department does not make
business decisions for project proponents.
[1135] In my opinion, the remaining alleged essential terms are supplied by existing legislation,
regulations or Departmental policies. The Plaintiffs are deemed to know the legislation and
regulations. It is also clear that the Plaintiffs were aware of the Department’s policies.
[1136] In the result, I conclude that there was no uncertainty as to the necessary terms.
[1137] The Defendant also drew the Court’s attention to the fact that Mr. Fehr testified that there
was no contract. The finding of a contract is a question of law for this Court and not for Mr. Fehr.