Des Roches v. Wasauksing First Nation, (2014) 469 F.T.R. 17 (FC)

• Judge: Kane, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: September 18, 2014
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2014), 469 F.T.R. 17 (FC);2014 FC 1126

Des Roches v. Wasauksing First Nation (2014), 469 F.T.R. 17 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] F.T.R. TBEd. DE.018

Luc Des Roches (applicant) v. Wasauksing First Nation (respondent)

(T-1737-13; 2014 FC 1126)

Indexed As: Des Roches v. Wasauksing First Nation

Federal Court

Kane, J.

November 25, 2014.

Summary:

The Wasauksing First Nation imposed a surcharge on each carton of tax exempt and unmarked cigarettes allocated to retailers on the First Nation. A convenience store operator applied for judicial review, seeking a declaration that the surcharge was unlawful, an injunction to prohibit the First Nation from levying the surcharge in the future, and an order requiring the First Nation to refund the money collected from him.

The Federal Court dismissed the application, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the issue.

Courts - Topic 4021

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction - Trial Division - Relief against federal boards, commissions or tribunals - The Wasauksing First Nation imposed a surcharge on cartons of tax exempt and unmarked cigarettes allocated to First Nation retailers - A convenience store operator (applicant) applied for judicial review, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and a refund of money collected - The Federal Court dismissed the application for want of jurisdiction - The First Nation was not acting as a "federal board, commission or tribunal" (Federal Courts Act, s. 2), because it imposed the surcharge as part of its allocation of tax exempt cigarettes pursuant to provincial legislation (i.e., the Ontario Tobacco Tax Act) and a Tobacco Retailer Agreement - Further, the imposition of the surcharge was a contractual matter over which the court did not have jurisdiction (Federal Courts Act,  ss. 18(1) or 18.1) - Moreover, the court generally disagreed with the applicant that the surcharge was a tax - See paragraphs 10 to 70.

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6238

Government - Band councils (incl. chief and councillors) - Judicial review - [See Courts - Topic 4021 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6507

Taxation - Tobacco - [See Courts - Topic 4021 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6513

Taxation - Appeals or judicial review - [See Courts - Topic 4021 ].

Cases Noticed:

Gamblin v. Norway House Cree Nation Band Council et al. (2012), 424 F.T.R. 125; 2012 FC 1536, refd to. [para. 18].

Air Canada v. Toronto Port Authority et al. (2011), 426 N.R. 131; 211 A.C.W.S.(3d) 254; 2011 FCA 347, refd to. [para. 20].

Lawson v. Interior Tree Fruit and Vegetable Committee of Direction, [1931] S.C.R. 357; [1931] 2 D.L.R. 193, refd to. [para. 23].

Boniferro Mill Works ULC v. Ontario (2009), 248 O.A.C. 309; 308 D.L.R.(4th) 739; 2009 ONCA 75, refd to. [para. 29].

Anisman v. Canada Border Services Agency et al. (2010), 400 N.R. 137; 185 A.C.W.S.(3d) 354; 2010 FCA 52, refd to. [para. 34].

Devil's Gap Cottagers (1982) Ltd. v. Rat Portage Indian Band et al., [2009] 2 F.C.R. 267;  331 F.T.R. 87; 2008 FC 812, refd to. [para. 34].

Peace Hills Trust Co. v. Moccasin et al. (2005), 281 F.T.R. 201; 2005 FC 1364, refd to. [para. 38].

Cottrell v. Chippewas of Rama Mnjikaning First Nation (2009), 342 F.T.R. 295; 2009 FC 261, refd to. [para. 38].

Westbank First Nation v. British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 134; 246 N.R. 201; 129 B.C.A.C. 1; 210 W.A.C. 1; 165 D.L.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 46].

Des Roches v. Wasauksing First Nation (2014), 469 F.T.R. 1; 2014 FC 1125, refd to. [para. 50].

Minde v. Ermineskin Cree Nation et al. (2008), 372 N.R. 268; 168 A.C.W.S.(3d) 225;  2008 FCA 52, refd to. [para. 51].

Kozeyah v. Serpent River First Nation, [2007] O.T.C. Uned. A04; [2007] 2 C.N.L.R. 226, refd to. [para. 53].

Irving Shipbuilding Inc. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [2010] 2 F.C.R. 488; 389 N.R. 72; 2009 FCA 116, refd to. [para. 60].

Maloney v. Shubenacadie Indian Band et al. (2014), 447 F.T.R. 185; 237 A.C.W.S.(3d) 829; 2014 FC 129, refd to. [para. 62].

Statutes Noticed:

Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, sect. 2 [para. 2, Appendix].

Counsel:

Christopher James Sparling, for the applicant;

T. Michael Strickland, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Christopher James Sparling, Toronto, Ontario, for the applicant;

Buset & Partners, Thunder Bay, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard in Toronto, Ontario, on September 18, 2014, before Kane, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision in Ottawa, Ontario, on November 25, 2014.