R. v. Rebmann (R.), (1994) 122 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 111 (NFTD)

• Judge: Roberts, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: September 08, 1994
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1994), 122 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 111 (NFTD)

R. v. Rebmann (R.) (1994), 122 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 111 (NFTD);

    379 A.P.R. 111

MLB headnote and full text

Sa Majesté la Reine (requérante) c. Roger Rebmann, de St-Pierre et Miquelon, Jacky Serge-Fernant Basle, de St-Pierre, Albert Pen, de St-Pierre et Miquelon, Gérard Grignon, de St-Pierre, Jean-Louis Audoux, de St-Pierre et Yvon Dodeman, de St-Pierre (intimés)

(Nos. 19936204, 19936241)

Indexed As: R. v. Rebmann (R.) et al.

Newfoundland Supreme Court

Trial Division

Roberts, J.

September 8, 1994.

Summary:

The accused, French fishermen from St-Pierre and Miquelon, were charged with illegally fishing in Canadian waters.

The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, convicted the accused.

Administrative Law - Topic 7565

Delegated powers - Sub-delegation of powers - Prohibition against delegation by a delegate - Delegatus non potest delegare - French fishermen from St-Pierre and Miquelon were charged with illegally fishing in Canadian waters - In defence, they argued that the applicable fishing quota, set by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans under s. 10(1) of the Foreign Vessel Fishing Regulations adopted by the "Governor-in-Council" under the Fisheries Act (Can.), was invalid - More precisely, they argued that the Fisheries Act gave the quota setting power to the "Governor-in-Council" only and that the latter was not entitled to subdelegate that power to the Minister - The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, rejected this argu­ment and convicted the fishermen - See paragraphs 29 to 41.

Criminal Law - Topic 255

Abuse of process - Power of court - Prevention and remedies - A 1972 treaty between Canada and France, authorized fishermen from St-Pierre and Miquelon to fish in Canadian waters, subject to Cana­dian fishing regulation - When fishermen from St-Pierre and Miquelon were charged with illegally fishing in Canadian waters, they replied that they were the victims of abuse of process because of (1) Canadian govern­mental action respec­ting the fishing quotas applicable to French nationals, (2) the negative response by Canada to France's offer to arbitrate a fishing dis­pute between the two countries and (3) the charge against them - The fishermen asked for a stay of proceedings - The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Divi­sion, denied this request - See paragraphs 42 to 47.

Fish and Game - Topic 162

Fisheries - Regulation - Persons empowered to regulate - [See Adminis­trative Law - Topic 7565 ].

Treaties - Topic 1606

Operation and effect - Domestic or inter­nal consequences - French fishermen from St-Pierre and Miquelon were charged with illegally fishing in Canadian waters - In defence, the fishermen invoked a 1972 treaty between Canada and France, autho­rizing fishermen from St-Pierre and Miquelon to fish in Canadian waters, subject to Canadian fishing regulation - The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, convicted the accused - The court held that it did not have jurisdiction to interpret the treaty because the treaty had not been incorporated into Canadian internal law - See paragraphs 10 to 28.

Cases Noticed:

Canada (Attorney General) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [1937] A.C. 326 (P.C.), consd. [para. 12].

Arrow River & Tributaries Slide & Boom Co. v. Pigeon Timber Co., [1932] S.C.R. 495, consd. [para. 12].

Francis v. R., [1956] S.C.R. 618, consd. [para. 12].

Daniels v. White, [1968] S.C.R. 517, consd. [para. 21].

Rayner (J.H.)(Mincing Lane) Ltd. v. United Kingdom (Department of Trade and Industry), [1989] 3 W.L.R. 969; 129 N.R. 321 (H.L.), consd. [para. 24].

British Airways Board v. Laker Airways, [1985] A.C. 58; [1984] 3 All E.R. 39 (H.L.), consd. [para. 25].

Shoal Lake Band of Indians No. 39 v. R. (1979), 25 O.R.(2d) 334 (H.C.), consd. [para. 35].

Peralta et al. v. Ontario (1985), 7 O.A.C. 283; 16 D.L.R.(4th) 259 (C.A.), consd. [para. 37].

R. v. Jewitt, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 128; 61 N.R. 159; [1985] 6 W.W.R. 127; 21 C.C.C.(3d) 7; 20 D.L.R.(4th) 651; 47 C.R.(3d) 193, consd. [para. 43].

R. v. Conway, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1659; 96 N.R. 241; 34 O.A.C. 165; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 70 C.R.(3d) 209, consd. [para. 46].

Statutes Noticed:

Agreement respecting Mutual Relations between Canada and France concerning Fishing, March 27, 1972, generally [para. 9]; art. 2 [para. 14].

Coastal Fisheries Protection Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-33, sect. 4(1) [para. 16]; sect. 4(1)(a) [para. 1]; sect. 6, sect. 6(a), sect. 6(a)(i), sect. 6(b) [para. 48].

Coastal Fisheries Protection Act Regula­tions (Can.), Coastal Fisheries Protection Regulations, C.R.C. 1978, c. 413, gen­erally [para. 49].

Coastal Fisheries Protection Regulations - see Coastal Fisheries Protection Act Regulations (Can.).

Constitution Act, 1867, sect. 91, sect. 92 [para. 10].

Extradition Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-21, sect. 3 [para. 17].

Fisheries Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-14, sect. 43(a), sect. 43(b), sect. 43(c), sect. 43(d), sect. 43(e), sect. 43(f), sect. 43(g), sect. 43(h), sect. 43(i), sect. 43(j), sect. 43(k), sect. 43(m) [para. 30]; sect. 43(l) [para. 33].

Fisheries Act Regulations (Can.), Foreign Vessel Fishing Regulations, C.R.C. 1978, c. 815, s. 10 [para. 32].

Foreign Vessel Fishing Regulations - see Fisheries Act Regulations (Can.).

Authors and Works Noticed:

Arbour, J. Maurice, Droit international public, 2 e éd., pp. 85 [para. 10]; 102 [para. 23]; 107 [para. 11].

Castel, J.-G., International Law (1976), pp. 973 [para. 13]; 975 [para. 15].

Côté, Pierre-André, Interprétation des lois, 2 e éd., 1990, p. 259 [para. 20].

Emmanuelli, C. and S. Slosar, L'applica­tion de l'interprétation des traités inter­nationaux par le juge canadien (1978), 13 R.J.T. 69, p. 73 [para. 16].

Read, J.E., International Agreements, 26 C.B.R. 520, generally [para. 13].

Rowe, Frederick W., History of New­foundland, generally [para. 9].

Willis, John, Delegatus non potest delegare, 21 C.B.R. 257, p. 260 [para. 39].

Counsel:

Danielle Côté and Gordon McNab, for the Crown;

André Richard and Kenneth Templeton, for the accused.

This case was heard by Roberts, J., of the Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division.

Roberts, J., delivered the following deci­sion on September 8, 1994.