Sga'nisim Sim'augit (Chief Mountain) et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., (2012) 317 B.C.A.C. 50 (CA)

• Judge: Groberman, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: January 30, 2012
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2012), 317 B.C.A.C. 50 (CA);2012 BCCA 69

Sga'nisim Sim'augit v. Can. (A.G.) (2012), 317 B.C.A.C. 50 (CA);

    540 W.A.C. 50

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] B.C.A.C. TBEd. FE.024

Sga'nisim Sim'augit (Chief Mountain), also known as James Robinson, suing on his own behalf and on behalf of all the members of the House of Sga'nisim, Nisibil Ada, also known as Mercy Thomas and Wilp-Lth Git Gingolx ("The Association of Git Gingolx Tribe Members") suing on its own behalf and on behalf of all its members (appellants/plaintiffs) v. The Attorney General of Canada, Her Majesty in Right of British Columbia and the Nisga'a Nation (respondents/defendants)

(CA039476; 2012 BCCA 69)

Indexed As: Sga'nisim Sim'augit (Chief Mountain) et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Groberman, J.A.

January 30, 2012.

Summary:

The appellants sought permission to file a 55 page factum, instead of the usual upper limit of 30 pages.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Groberman, J.A., refused the request to file a 55 page factum, but did allow for 35 pages.

Editor's Note: The case appealed from is reported at [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1394.

Practice - Topic 9

General principles and definitions - Dispensing with compliance with rules - [See second Practice - Topic 9455 ].

Practice - Topic 9455

Appeals - Factum, case on appeal or appeal book - Content (incl. length of factum) - The appellants sought permission to file a 55 page factum, instead of the usual upper limit of 30 pages (Court of Appeal Rules (BC), rule 22(2)) - The appellants' argument involved a challenge to the constitutionality of a first nations agreement and enabling legislation - The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Groberman, J.A., refused the request to file a 55 page factum, but did allow for 35 pages - While the appeal would involve a consideration of several provisions of the Constitution Act, 1867, it was not factually complex - There were no particular difficulties apparent in the definition of the issues or in the statement of relief sought - However, there were a number of facets to the legal argument to be advanced - Groberman, J.A., commented that a draft factum would have assisted the court in evaluating whether a lengthy factum should be allowed.

Practice - Topic 9455

Appeals - Factum, case on appeal or appeal book - Content (incl. length of factum) - The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Groberman, J.A., reviewed the principles applicable on an application to file a factum longer than the usual upper limit of 30 pages provided for in rule 22(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules (BC) - See paragraphs 3 to 18.

Cases Noticed:

Brown v. Lowe et al., [2000] B.C.A.C. Uned. 201; 2000 BCCA 635, refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Port Chevrolet Oldsmobile Ltd. et al. (2008), 262 B.C.A.C. 51; 441 W.A.C. 51; 2008 BCCA 443, refd to. [para. 4].

Maughan v. University of British Columbia et al. (2008), 262 B.C.A.C. 70; 441 W.A.C. 70; 2008 BCCA 452, refd to. [para. 4].

Campbell et al. v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al., [2000] B.C.T.C. 528; 189 D.L.R.(4th) 333; 79 B.C.L.R.(3d) 122; 2000 BCSC 1123, refd to. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Court of Appeal Rules (B.C.) - see Rules of Court (B.C.), Court of Appeal Rules.

Rules of Court (B.C.), Court of Appeal Rules, rule 22(2) [para. 8].

Counsel:

P.E. Jaffe, for the appellants;

J.H. Russell and M.A. Hopkins, for the respondent, Attorney General of Canada;

P.E. Yearwood, for the respondent, Attorney General of British Columbia;

M.W. Bartley, for the respondent, Nisga'a Nation.

This matter was heard in Chambers in Vancouver, British Columbia, on January 30, 2012, before Groberman, J.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, who delivered the following decision orally on the same date.