Robertson v. Beauvais et al., (2014) 456 F.T.R. 1 (FC)

• Judge: Gleason, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: March 04, 2014
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2014), 456 F.T.R. 1 (FC);2014 FC 208

Robertson v. Beauvais (2014), 456 F.T.R. 1 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2014] F.T.R. TBEd. JA.003

Charles Robertson (plaintiff) v. Kyle Beauvais and Mohawk Council of Kahnawake (defendants) and Her Majesty the Queen (third party)

(T-1236-10; 2014 FC 208; 2014 CF 208)

Indexed As: Robertson v. Beauvais et al.

Federal Court

Gleason, J.

March 4, 2014.

Summary:

Robertson possessed two plots of land on the Mohawk Reserve at Kahnawake. In 2010, he verbally agreed to transfer his possessory rights to Beauvais, allegedly for a purchase price of $350,000. Although Beauvais paid him only a $5,000 deposit, Robertson went to the Land Management Office of the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake and signed two land transfer documents in favour of Beauvais. Robertson claimed that he signed the transfers in error because he was confused and unable to read them. Beauvais took possession of the land and refused to pay any further amounts. Robertson brought an action against Beauvais and the Council. He sought various orders and declarations, and claimed damages for (1) breaches of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms; (2) breaches of duties under the Civil Code of Quebec; and (3) the Council's breach of its fiduciary duties toward him.

The Federal Court dismissed the claim against the Council. The court declared that Robertson was lawfully entitled to possession of the land. Any current tenants of the land were directed to pay rent to Robertson rather than Beauvais. Beauvais was ordered to pay Robertson compensatory damages for lost rent, and exemplary damages of $5,000. The court declined to award moral damages because Robertson failed to provide evidence of the moral prejudice which he claimed to have suffered as a result of being deprived of his garage which was situated on the land.

Contracts - Topic 6

General principles - General - What constitutes the contract - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5421 ].

Courts - Topic 4035

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction - Federal Court - Proceedings to determine disputes where Crown under obligation, of which there are competing claims - [See Courts - Topic 4039 ].

Courts - Topic 4039

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction - Federal Court - Civil actions - Robertson possessed two plots of land on the Mohawk Reserve at Kahnawake - He verbally agreed to transfer his possessory rights to Beauvais - Robertson mistakenly signed two land transfer documents in favour of Beauvais before Beauvais had paid the full purchase price - Beauvais took possession and refused to pay the full amount - Robertson sued Beauvais, seeking several declarations, an order requiring Beauvais to return the land to him, and damages - The Crown was added as a third party - Beauvais argued that the Federal Court did not have jurisdiction to award damages because the claim involved a private contractual dispute which depended to a large extent on provincial law - The Federal Court rejected this argument - Robertson's claim for damages was accessory to and flowed directly from a finding that Beauvais was not entitled to possess the land - The court could grant all appropriate relief in cases where there was a dispute over entitlement to reserve lands in cases where the Crown was impleaded - To hold otherwise would cast an unwarranted burden on plaintiffs by requiring them to bifurcate their claims if they chose to invoke the court's undoubted jurisdiction to grant declaratory and injunctive relief - The fact that the court might have to apply provincial law did not forestall this conclusion where the claim, in pith and substance, fell within the court's jurisdiction - See paragraphs 81 to 103.

Courts - Topic 4054

Federal Court of Canada - Jurisdiction - Federal Court - Indians, Inuit and Métis - [See Courts - Topic 4039 ].

Damages - Topic 1297

Exemplary or punitive damages - When awarded - Robertson was a 70 year old man with poor reading skills - He possessed two plots of land on the Mohawk Reserve at Kahnawake - He verbally agreed to transfer his possessory rights to Beauvais for $350,000 - When Beauvais had paid only a $5,000 deposit, Robertson went to the Land Management Office of the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake and mistakenly signed two land transfer documents in favour of Beauvais - Beauvais took possession of the land and refused to pay any further amounts - The Federal Court allowed Robertson's claim against Beauvais and ordered Beauvais to pay, inter alia, exemplary damages of $5,000 - Beauvais deliberately and wrongfully retained possession of the land (Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, s. 49) - See paragraphs 121 to 125.

Damages - Topic 1301.2

Exemplary or punitive damages - Wrongful seizure of realty - [See Damages - Topic 1297 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5421

Lands - Transfer of lands - General - Robertson possessed two plots of land on the Mohawk Reserve at Kahnawake - He verbally agreed to transfer his possessory rights to Beauvais - Robertson mistakenly signed two land transfer documents in favour of Beauvais before Beauvais had paid the full purchase price - Beauvais took possession and refused to pay the full amount - Robertson sued Beauvais, seeking several declarations, an order requiring Beauvais to return the land to him, and damages - The Crown was added as a third party - Beauvais argued that Robertson could not rely on failure to appreciate the nature of the transfers because he was guilty of an "inexcusable error" which could not constitute a defect of consent (Quebec Civil Code, art. 1400) - The Federal Court held that the concept of inexcusable error did not apply in this case - First, the doctrine applied to contracts, but land transfer documents did not constitute a contract and were not equivalent to deeds - They were only evidence of an intention to transfer land - Second, even if the doctrine did apply, Robertson's error was excusable - He was 70 years old, distracted and had difficulty reading - See paragraphs 107 to 113.

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6222.1

Government - Band councils (incl. chief and councillors) - Fiduciary duties - Robertson was a 70 year old man with poor reading skills - He possessed two plots of land on the Mohawk Reserve at Kahnawake - He verbally agreed to transfer his possessory rights to Beauvais for $350,000 - When Beauvais had paid only a $5,000 deposit, Robertson went to the Land Management Office (LMO) of the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake and mistakenly signed two land transfer documents in favour of Beauvais - Beauvais took possession of the land and refused to pay any further amounts - Robertson brought an action against the Council, asserting that it had breached its fiduciary duties toward him by not ensuring that he understood the transfers before he signed them and by not ensuring that the agreed-upon purchase price had been paid - The Federal Court dismissed the claim - Council's duty to act in the best interest of band members did not require it to chaperone band members through every step of the land transfer process - The Council employees who interacted with Robertson behaved reasonably - They had no reason to doubt Robertson's capacity to understand the transfers, and they followed the same procedure that the LMO had always adopted - See paragraphs 75 to 78.

Quebec Nominate Contracts - Topic 3306

Sale - Remedies - General - Loss of - By conduct - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5421 ].

Quebec Responsibility - Topic 3415

Damages - Punitive or exemplary damages - Entitlement - Unlawful and intentional interference with Charter rights (Que.) - [See Damages - Topic 1297 ].

Sale of Land - Topic 3692

Contract - Discharge, rescission or annulment - Bars - Statutory - General - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5421 ].

Sale of Land - Topic 6084

Completion - Deed - Deed and transfer distinguished - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 5421 ].

Cases Noticed:

Delgumuukw et al. v. British Columbia et al., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010; 220 N.R. 161; 99 B.C.A.C. 161; 162 W.A.C. 161; 153 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Van der Peet (D.M.), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 507; 200 N.R. 1; 80 B.C.A.C. 81; 130 W.A.C. 81; 137 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. 22].

Annapolis Valley First Nations Band v. Toney (2004), 267 F.T.R. 186; 2004 FC 1728, refd to. [para. 76].

Wewayakai Indian Band v. Chickite - see Assu et al. v. Chickite et al.

Assu et al. v. Chickite et al., [1998] B.C.T.C. Uned. H07; [1999] 1 C.N.L.R. 14 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 76].

Blueberry Interim Trust et al., Re, [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 769; [2011] B.C.W.L.D. 6951; 2011 BCSC 769, refd to. [para. 76].

Williams Lake Indian Band v. Abbey - see Gilbert et al. v. Abbey.

Gilbert et al. v. Abbey, [1992] B.C.T.C. Uned. 734; 4 C.N.L.R. 21; [1992] B.C.W.L.D. 1783 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 76].

Miida Electronics Inc. v. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd. and ITO-International Terminal Operators Ltd., [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752; 68 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 81].

Stoney Indian Band et al. v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development), [2006] 1 F.C.R. 570; 337 N.R. 265; 2005 FCA 220, refd to. [para. 82].

St-Hilaire v. Canada (Procureur général) et al. (2001), 277 N.R. 201; 2001 FCA 63, refd to. [para. 82].

Roberts v. Canada - see Wewayakum Indian Band v. Canada and Wewayakai Indian Band.

Wewayakum Indian Band v. Canada and Wewayakai Indian Band, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 322; 92 N.R. 241; 25 F.T.R. 161; 57 D.L.R.(4th) 197, refd to. [para. 83].

Jones et al. v. Louis et al., [1996] 3 C.N.L.R. 85; 108 F.T.R. 81 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 86].

Bande des Abénakis de Wôlinak v. Bernard et al., [1998] 2 C.N.L.R. 51; 160 F.T.R. 13 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 88].

Watts v. Kincolith Indian Band et al. (2000), 187 F.T.R. 83 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 91].

Hofer v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development) et al., [2002] F.T.R. Uned. 17; 2002 FCT 16, refd to. [para. 92].

Gladstone v. Blood Indian Band, [2004] F.T.R. Uned. 665; 2004 FC 856, refd to. [para. 93].

Hunt v. T & N plc et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959; 117 N.R. 321; 74 D.L.R.(4th) 321, refd to. [para. 95].

Montana Indian Band et al. v. Canada, [1991] 2 F.C. 273; 44 F.T.R. 183 (T.D.), affd. [1993] 2 C.N.L.R. 134 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1993), 155 N.R. 320 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 96].

Paul v. Kingsclear Indian Band et al. (1997), 132 F.T.R. 145; 148 D.L.R.(4th) 759 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 97].

Powless v. Sandy (1995), 95 F.T.R. 57; 55 A.C.W.S.(3d) 1167 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 98].

Lower Similkameen Indian Band v. Allison et al. (1996), 111 F.T.R. 199 (T.D.), dist. [para. 99].

Morin-Légaré v. Légaré, [2002] R.J.Q. 2237 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 107].

Lépine v. Khalid, [2004] R.J.Q. 2415 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 107].

Corporation First Capital (Carrefour Don Quichotte) Inc. v. Massé, 2008 QCCS 4080, refd to. [para. 109].

Gingras Jacques Lajoie et Associés Ltée. v. 9081-7263 Québec Inc., [2003] Q.J. No. 18944, refd to. [para. 110].

Banque nationale du Canada v. Marcoux, [1999] Q.J. No. 174 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 110].

Beaulieu v. Vaillancourt, EYB 2006-108100 (Q.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 120].

Lee v. Leung, EYB 2010- 172586; 2010 QCCS 1538, refd to. [para. 120].

Markarian v. Marchés mondiaux CIBC Inc, 2006 QCCS 3314, refd to. [para. 123].

Investissements Historia Inc v. Gervais Harding et Ass. Inc., JE 2006-955 (Q.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 123].

Pearl v. Investissements Contempra Ltée., [1995] R.J.Q. 2697 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 123].

Bilodeau v. Dufort, REJB 2000-16738 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 123].

Aubry v. 3370160 Canada Inc., JE 2001-908 (C.Q.), refd to. [para. 124].

Ghaho v. Germain, 2013 QCCS 2604, refd to. [para. 124].

Paquin v. Le Territoire des Lacs Inc., REJB 2002-38037 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 124].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Jobin, Pierre-Gabriel, and Vézina, Nathalie, Baudoin et Jobin: Les Obligations (7th Ed. 2013), pp. 328 [para. 107]; 329 [para. 108].

Sopinka, Lederman & Bryant, The Law of Evidence in Canada (3rd Ed. 2009), §6.449 [para. 63].

Counsel:

John Seymour Glazer, for the plaintiff;

Joesph Elfassy and Frédérick Pinto, for the defendant, Kyle Beauvais;

R. Alexandre Janin, for the defendant, Mohawk Council of Kahnawake.

Solicitors of Record:

Leithman and Glazer, Montreal, Quebec, for the plaintiff;

Elfassy, Rose, Montreal, Quebec, for the defendant, Kyle Beauvais;

Gasco Goodhue St-Germain LLP, Montreal, Quebec, for the defendant, Mohawk Council of Kahnawake.

This matter was heard at Montreal, Quebec, on October 21-25, 2013, before Gleason, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 4, 2014.