Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 317
[1188] It is not disputed that the Plaintiffs built the mill in Watson Lake as a business venture. The
evidence was that the mill was expected to make a profit. There was also evidence that the Plaintiffs
were prepared to shut down sawmilling operations if there was no prospect of the joint venture
being a viable business.
[1189] There is evidence that the Plaintiffs were aware of their options of making other
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
investments. For example, I refer to the letter of Mr. Heit to Ms. Guscott, dated March 19, 1999; see
Exhibit D-13. In his letter, Mr. Heit advised the Department that unless there was a reasonable level
of optimism, with respect to the availability of timber, he would recommend that the mill close, and
the operation move to a more business friendly jurisdiction.
[1190] I find, from Mr. Heit’s March 19 th letter and all of the surrounding circumstances, that the
Plaintiffs were prepared to shut down the Watson Lake sawmill operation and invest in building a
business in a different jurisdiction.
[1191] I have already found that the Plaintiffs have succeeded in their causes of action for breach of
contract, negligence and negligent misrepresentation. I also find that they have met their burden
with respect to evidence, on the balance of probabilities, concerning their losses.
[1192] The Defendant addressed the issue of damages in her closing submissions. She argued that
the damages claimed by the Plaintiff were speculative and consequently, could not be recovered. In