Maurice v. Canada ( Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development )
T-1057-96
Reed J.
10/12/99
7 pp.
Public interest standing-Motion to have Metis Society of Saskatchewan Sapwagamik Local 176 Inc. (Society) (corporation with capacity to sue and be sued, representing interests of Metis persons around Sapwagamik) removed as plaintiff-Action claim by individual plaintiffs arising from defendants' refusal to pay them compensation equal to that paid to other aboriginal peoples as result of creation of Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range and consequent displacement of individuals who had previously used land for hunting and fishing and logging-Relief sought relates to constitutional, fiduciary, statutory, common law and equitable obligations owed by defendants to plaintiffs-Relief sought relating only to individual plaintiffs, not to Society, as corporation-Society failing to meet one of requirements for public interest standing set out in Canadian Council of Churches v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 236, i.e. that there be no other reasonable and effective manner in which question may be brought to Court-Here, action by private litigants in existence-Plaintiffs argue Benoit et al. v. Canada (1994), 81 F.T.R. 100 (F.C.T.D.) standing for proposition public interest standing should be granted where person's participation as co-plaintiff would be of assistance to Court in making its final determination on matter already before it-In fact, Benoit case decided on basis plaintiff necessary party within Federal Court Rules, R. 1716(2)(b)-Society herein not necessary party to litigation as defined in Amon v. Raphael Tuck & Sons Ltd., [1956] 1 Q.B. 357: only reason making it necessary to make person party to action so that bound by result of action, and question to be settled therefore must be question in action which cannot be effectually and completely settled unless person party-Motion allowed, without prejudice to Society to seek to become involved in respresentative capacity, at later date, particularly if present individual plaintiffs become prevented from continuing litigation, or to seek intervener status-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 1716(2)(b).