This case involved charges under the Federal Fisheries Act of fishing during a closed season. The main defence in the case involved a challenge of the authority of the Regional Director to make a variation order that purported to close the waters in question to fishing on the grounds that it had been improperly subdelegated by the Regional Director-General. The …
These summaries of Fisheries law cases were prepared by retired lawyer Brad Caldwell.
Readers are cautioned this material is not up to date and are urged to consult CanLii for updated cases.
R v. Corcoran, N.J. No. 180 (Nfld. S.C.)
This case involved a variation order which declared that fishing was prohibited in a local area "beginning on January 1 and ending on December 31". The trial judge ruled that the variation order was vague and that it failed to properly prohibit fishing during a "specified period" as within the meaning of the Act. The appeal was allowed and the …
Full SummaryR v. Gorman, 1998 CanLII 3545
This was a summary conviction appeal of an order of a Provincial Court acquitting an accused fisher of an offence on the grounds that a Variation order had not been published in the Canada Gazette. The appeal court set aside the acquittal on the grounds that sections 15(1) and 7(1) j of the Statutory Instruments Act had not been brought …
Full SummaryR v. Corcoran, 1999 CanLII 19147
This case involved a charge against an inshore cod fisherman for fishing during a closed time (see digest of earlier decision from this case in 1997). This case is a summary conviction appeal on the grounds that the Regional Director General improperly delegated his authority to sign a variation order closing the fishery. After reviewing the authorities, and concluding that …
Full Summary