PRACTICE |
Parties |
Standing |
Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-kwa-mish Tribes v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans)
T-173-02
2003 FCT 30, Rouleau J.
14/1/03
16 pp.
Judicial review of Minister of Fisheries and Oceans' (Minister) decision to issue Marine Mammal Predator Control licence to Burdwood Island aquaculture site operated by respondent Heritage Salmon Limited, authorizing respondent to kill seals and sea lions destroying or attempting to destroy fish held or reared in sea cages belonging to respondent-- Licence imposing no limit with respect to killing of seals and sea lions--Licence not requiring respondent to use killed mammals for food or for any other purpose--Applicant Tribes oppose licence as allegedly affecting traditional seal hunting grounds--Whether applicant has standing to bring present application for judicial review--Two avenues by which applicant can establish standing in judicial review application--Federal Court Act, s. 18.1(1) allowing anyone directly affected by matter or anyone meeting test for public interest standing to bring application--Applicant did not adduce any evidence licence has had any detrimental impact on Tribes' ability to hunt for seals--Allegations by applicant regarding issues of Aboriginal rights and consultation not relevant to present case and have no bearing on question of whether applicant and Tribes' members directly affected by Minister's decision--Fact activity authorized by licence may be disrespectful to Tribes' way of life not sufficient to establish Tribes suffering direct, adverse impact from such activity such as to bring Tribes within scope of Act, s. 18.1(1) --No evidence demonstrating Tribe members directly affected by Minister's decision to issue licence--As to whether applicant has public interest standing, Court must weigh three factors set out in Canada v. Harris, [2000] 4 F.C. 37 (C.A.)-- First, whether strong public interest issue raised before Court --Issue of public importance herein since Court's decision will not necessarily be limited to facts of present case--Issue relating to scope of Minister's constitutional fisheries power and how Minister exercises authority conferred by fisheries legislation--Second, whether applicant has genuine interest in issue or in outcome of litigation--In present case, applicant falling short of establishing reasonable cause of action or fairly arguable case--Third, whether absence of other reasonable and effective means of bringing issue forward for resolution--Applicant failed to establish serious issue warranting consideration and expenditure of resources of Court--Accordingly, public interest standing refused; application for judicial review dismissed--Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 18.1(1) (as enacted by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 5).