Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), (1998) 229 N.R. 249 (FCA)

• Judge: Denault, Létourneau and McDonald, JJ.A.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: July 02, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1998), 229 N.R. 249 (FCA)

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. v. Can. (1998), 229 N.R. 249 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] N.R. TBEd. AU.009

In The Matter Of an application to review and set aside pursuant to section 18(1) of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, as amended;

And The Matter Of a decision by the Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, on the 7th day of April 1997, with respect to the establishment of turbot quotas for the Davis Strait Fishery

(NR-HQ-97-20E)

Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (appellant) v. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. (respondent) and Makivik Corporation (intervenor)

(A-583-97)

Indexed As: Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans)

Federal Court of Appeal

Denault, Létourneau and McDonald, JJ.A.

July 13, 1998.

Summary:

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans made a decision respecting fishing quotas for 1997. The applicant applied to set aside the de­cision, alleging that it breached the terms of a land claims agreement between the Inuit of the Nunavut Settlement Area and the Government of Canada.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Di­vision, in a decision reported at 134 F.T.R. 246, allowed the application. The Minister appealed.

The Federal Court of Appeal rejected the motions judge's reasons for decision, but dismissed the appeal for other reasons.

Administrative Law - Topic 547

The hearing and decision - Decisions of the tribunal - Reasons for decision - When required - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5522 ].

Fish and Game - Topic 969

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - Right to fish and regulation of Inuit fishery - Al­location priorities - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5522 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5522

Lands - Land claim agreements - Interpre­tation - The applicant applied to set aside a decision of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans - The applicant alleged that the decision breached a land claims agreement between the Nunavut Settlement Area Inuit and the Canadian Government, which required the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to give "special consideration" to the principles of adjacency and economic dependency when allocating commercial fishing licenses within certain zones - The Federal Court of Appeal affirmed that the Minister's decision should be set aside - The absence of explanations or reasons, in the surrounding circumstances, lead to a reasonable inference that the Minister either did not give special consideration to the adjacency and economic dependency principles or misconstrued the principles, when allocating the commercial fishing licences - See paragraphs 52 to 64.

Words and Phrases

Consider - A land claims settlement agree­ment between the Inuit of the Nunavut Settlement Area and the Canadian Govern­ment made it incumbent on the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to "consider" the advice and recommendations of Inuit ad­visory boards in making decisions affecting marine areas - The Federal Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the word "consider" as found in the agreement - See paragraphs 29 to 41.

Cases Noticed:

Comeau's Sea Foods Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 12; 206 N.R. 363; 142 D.L.R.(4th) 193; 43 Admin. L.R.(2d) 1; 31 C.C.L.T.(2d) 236, refd to. [para. 13].

Gulf Trollers Association et al. v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) et al., [1987] 2 F.C. 93; 72 N.R. 31 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [1987] 1 S.C.R. viii; 77 N.R. 157, refd to. [para. 14].

MacKinnon et al. v. Canada, [1987] 1 F.C. 490; 6 F.T.R. 203 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 14].

Vancouver Island Peace Society et al. v. Canada (Minister of National Defence) et al. (1993), 64 F.T.R. 127; 19 Admin. L.R.(2d) 91 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 14].

Carpenter Fishing Corp. et al. v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) et al. (1997), 221 N.R. 372 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

Barron v. Minister of National Revenue (1997), 209 N.R. 392 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

Vancouver Island Peace Society et al. v. Canada (Minister of National Defence) et al., [1992] 3 F.C. 42; 53 F.T.R. 300 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 18].

Canadian Association of Regulated Importers et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [1994] 2 F.C. 247; 164 N.R. 342 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Association Candienne des importeurs réglementés v. Canada - see Canadian Association of Regulated Importers et al. v. Canada (Attorney General).

Maple Lodge Farms v. Canada and Canada (Minister of Economic Development), [1982] 2 S.C.R. 2; 44 N.R. 354, refd to. [para. 19].

Canada (Attorney General) v. Purcell, [1996] 1 F.C. 644; 192 N.R. 148 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Shah v. Minister of Employment and Im­migration (1994), 170 N.R. 238 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Sparrow, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075; 111 N.R. 24l; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 263; 70 D.L.R.(4th) 385, dist. [para. 46].

Williams v. Canada (Minister of Citizen­ship and Immigration), [1997] 2 F.C. 646; 212 N.R. 631 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 55].

Cantwell et al. v. Canada (Minister of Environment) et al. (1991), 41 F.T.R. 18 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 56].

R. v. Civil Service Appeal Board, [1991] 4 All E.R. 310 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 64].

Statutes Noticed:

Fisheries Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-14, sect. 7 [para. 16].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Chambers 20th Century Thesaurus (1986), p. 378 [para. 34].

Collins Cobuild English Language Dic­tionary (1987), pp. 672, 849 [para. 34].

Oxford English Dictionary (1970), pp. 156, 338 [para. 34].

Petit Robert, Dictionnaire de la langue française (1991), pp. 602, 654 [para. 34].

Random House Dictionary of the English Language (1987), pp. 882, 1121 [para. 34].

West's Legal Thesaurus/Dictionary (Special Ed. 1986), p. 462 [para. 34].

Counsel:

Brian Everndon, for the appellant;

Dougald E. Brown and Will Hinz, for the respondent;

Peter Hutchins and David Kalmakoff, for the intervenor.

Solicitors of Record:

Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney Gen­eral of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the appellant;

Nelligan Power, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent;

Hutchins, Soroka & Dionne, Montreal, Quebec, for the intervenor.

This appeal was heard in Ottawa, Ontario, on July 2, 1998, by Denault, Létourneau and McDonald, JJ.A., of the Federal Court of Appeal. The following judgment of the court was delivered on July 13, 1998.