Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 374
[1399] Next, I must comment on the non-disclosure of Exhibit P-38, the August 1991 final version
of the Sterling Wood Report. The Defendant disclosed the draft version of this document in her trial
documents, later entered as part of Exhibit D-81, at Tab 3.
[1400] Exhibit P-38 was entered as an exhibit on day 19 of the trial. Exhibit P-38, the Sterling
Wood Report, is a FMP. It was entered as an exhibit during the cross-examination of the
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
Defendant’s witness, Mr. Monty. Mr. Monty was the sixth witness called on behalf of the
Defendant. As of the last day of hearing in this trial, that is September 17, 2008, Exhibit P-38 was
the only FMP that had been produced as an exhibit in this action.
[1401] Why was this not disclosed prior to the beginning of the trial Why was it not produced
when the Defendant began her case
[1402] Mr. Ivanski, the RDG when LPL first approached DIAND about building a mill in Watson
Lake, was the fourth witness called by the Defendant. Mr. Ivanski testified, in cross-examination,
about P-38.
[1403] In my opinion, Mr. Ivanski’s evidence is internally contradictory. On the one hand, he stated
at page 2655 of the transcript:
Q And sir, you spoke yesterday of a forest management plan,
do you remember that
A
Yes.