This case involved a fish harvester who plead guilty to catching undersize whelk. After a general review of the principals of sentencing for fisheries matters, the court dealt with the issue of forfeiture of the catch. In doing so it said "[T]he amount of the fine must be set in conjunction with the issue of forfeiture. The fact there has …Full Summary
These summaries of recent Fisheries law cases are prepared by Brad Caldwell of Caldwell & Co., 401-815 Hornby Street, Vancouver, B.C., V6Z 2E6. Telephone (604) 689-8894, E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. Papers related to Fisheries law and additional groupings of Fisheries law cases by sub-topic can be obtained at the full version of the website.
Readers are urged to consult CanLii for updates to the cases digested on this site.
This case involved a a 71 year old man who was caught setting a net across a creek from which three trout were retrieved. He was fined $3,000 for illegally fishing with a net and $1,000 for illegal possession of three trout. After reviewing a number of authorities regarding forfeitures under the Fisheries Act and concluding that it had the …Full Summary
This case involved a fish harvester caught with crab caught under a improperly marked buoy. The crab was seized and sold for $6,832.80. After reviewing the applicable authorities including R v. Rideout,  N.S.J. nO. 9 (N.S.S.C.) (digested herein), the court concluded that since it is possible that all the elements of the offence could have been established before any …Full Summary
Upon making an order for the forfeiture of a boat and outboard motor, the court said that: In determining the nature of any fine which is appropriate must consider any forfeiture order in applying the totality principle of sentencing (see R. v. Spellacy (1995), 131 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 127 (N.L.C.A.)) . . . If counsel seek to persuade a Court …Full Summary
This case involved a charge against a west coast trawl fisherman for fishing over a fishing area boundary line into a closed area that was delineated as being on the seaward side of a 40 fathom contour line. At trial, the court relied upon evidence from a navigator who used a global positioning device (G.P.S.) to go to the co-ordinates …Full Summary
This case involved an application for relief from forfeiture pursuant to section 75 (4) of the Fisheries Act which provides as follows: 75. (4) Where, on the hearing of an application made pursuant to subsection (1), it is made to appear to the satisfaction of the judge, (a) that the applicant is innocent of any complicity in the offence or …Full Summary
This case involved a fisher charged with recreational fishing for ground fish during a closed time. He was caught with 12 fish, was a first time offender, was not commercially trafficking in cod and plead guilty the first time the matter was brought before the court. The sentencing judge imposed a fine of $500 dollars and ordered forfeiture of his …Full Summary
This was a sentencing case involving two brothers who pleaded guilty of unlawful possession of salmon. Both brothers were fined $1,000 dollars. In the court also ordered the forfeiture of the boat owned by one brother with a value of $12,000 dollars. Upon appeal, the court set aside the forfeiture of the vessel and substituted an additional fine of $500 …Full Summary
This case involved a fisherman convicted under section 13(1) (c) of the Atlantic Fishing Regulations of permitting his crew to haul previously set lobster traps without him (the licence holder) being aboard the vessel. Upon sentencing, the trial judge refused to apply the mandatory forfeiture provisions of section 72(1) of the Fisheries Act to the proceeds of sale of the …Full Summary