Logan et al. v. Canada, (1994) 89 F.T.R. 37 (TD)

JudgeTeitelbaum, J.
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Case DateNovember 30, 1994
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1994), 89 F.T.R. 37 (TD)

Logan v. Can. (1994), 89 F.T.R. 37 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

William Ronald Logan, suing on behalf of himself as Master of the C.F.V. "Westisle" and on behalf of the Crew and Owner of the said vessel "Westisle" (plaintiff) v. Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Canada (defendant)

(T-1734-92)

Indexed As: Logan et al. v. Canada

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Teitelbaum, J.

December 15, 1994.

Summary:

The master of a fishing vessel brought an action on his own behalf and on behalf of the crew and owner of the vessel to recover the proceeds of sale of fish allegedly seized by the Crown.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, allowed the action in part.

Fish and Game - Topic 2904

Offences - Forfeitures - Limitations on power of forfeiture - The federal government attempted to regulate the fishing industry respecting forfeiture by means of individual agreements with vessel owners whereby the issue of quota and forfeiture was a condition to obtaining a licence - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that the portion of the agreements relating to forfeiture was ultra vires the Crown in that "overages" could be forfeited only pursuant to the Fisheries Act - See paragraphs 96 to 108.

Practice - Topic 207

Persons who can sue and be sued - Individuals - Status or standing - Class or representative actions - Respecting exercise of statutory power - A vessel's master, owner and crew entered into a joint venture whereby the proceeds of a particular fishing trip would be divided in different percentages among them - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that there was a "partnership in a limited sense" for that specific voyage, where the parties agreed to be responsible for any losses and to share any profits - The court held that the master could commence a representative action for himself and the others for return of the proceeds of sale of allegedly wrongfully seized fish, damages etc., as all had a common interest and grievance - See paragraphs 83 to 95.

Cases Noticed:

Mark Fishing Co. et al. v. United Fisherman & Allied Workers' Union et al. (1970), 75 W.W.R.(N.S.) 385 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 84].

Cairns et al. v. Farm Credit Corp. et al. (1991), 49 F.T.R. 308 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 88].

Oregon Jack Creek Indian Band v. Canadian National Railway Co. (1989), 56 D.L.R.(4th) 404 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 90].

Bedford (Duke) v. Ellis, [1901] A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 92].

Duke - see proper name of Duke.

Shaw v. Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver (1973), 36 D.L.R.(3d) 250 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 93].

Longmire v. Canada (1993), 69 F.T.R. 1 (T.D.), consd. [para. 96].

Statutes Noticed:

Federal Court Rules, rule 1708 [para. 86]; rule 1711 [paras. 87, 89]; rule 1711(1) [para. 91].

Fisheries Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-14, sect. 71, sect. 72, sect. 73, sect. 74, sect. 75, sect. 76, sect. 77 [para. 97].

Rules of Court (B.C.), Supreme Court Rules, rule 5(11) [para. 91].

Counsel:

Christopher Harvey, for the plaintiff;

John Mostowich, for the defendant.

Solicitors of Record:

Russell & Dumoulin, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the plaintiff;

George Thomson, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the defendant.

This case was heard on November 30, 1994, at Vancouver, British Columbia, before Teitelbaum, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on December 15, 1994.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Pawar v. Canada, (1996) 123 F.T.R. 257 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • September 9, 1996
    ...Micromar International Inc. v. Micro Furnace Ltd. (1988), 23 C.P.R.(3d) 214 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 13]. Logan et al. v. Canada (1994), 89 F.T.R. 37 (T.D.), refd to. [para. John v. Rees, [1970] Ch. 345 , refd to. [para. 14]. Duke of Bedford v. Ellis, [1901] A.C. 1 , refd to. [para. ......
  • Native Transfer Committee at Mountain Institution v. Canada (Solicitor General), (1997) 125 F.T.R. 10 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • January 6, 1997
    ...18]. Oregon Jack Creek Indian Band Chief v. Canadian National Railway - see Pasco v. Canadian National Railway. Logan et al. v. Canada (1995), 89 F.T.R. 37 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Markt & Co. v. Knight Steamship Co., [1910] 2 K.B. 1021 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Mayrhofer v. Canada ......
2 cases
  • Pawar v. Canada, (1996) 123 F.T.R. 257 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • September 9, 1996
    ...Micromar International Inc. v. Micro Furnace Ltd. (1988), 23 C.P.R.(3d) 214 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 13]. Logan et al. v. Canada (1994), 89 F.T.R. 37 (T.D.), refd to. [para. John v. Rees, [1970] Ch. 345 , refd to. [para. 14]. Duke of Bedford v. Ellis, [1901] A.C. 1 , refd to. [para. ......
  • Native Transfer Committee at Mountain Institution v. Canada (Solicitor General), (1997) 125 F.T.R. 10 (TD)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Federal Court (Canada)
    • January 6, 1997
    ...18]. Oregon Jack Creek Indian Band Chief v. Canadian National Railway - see Pasco v. Canadian National Railway. Logan et al. v. Canada (1995), 89 F.T.R. 37 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Markt & Co. v. Knight Steamship Co., [1910] 2 K.B. 1021 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Mayrhofer v. Canada ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT