R v. Dudoward et al.

In Due Diligence, Fish Cases, Offences on (Updated )

Four vessel operators were charged with gill net fishing for salmon in a closed area after drifting from an open area into a closed area. The open area was open to fishing for a number of different species of salmon but closed for chum salmon because there was a run of chum salmon in the vicinity that was endangered. The …

Anglehart v. Canada, 2016 FC 1159

In Fish Cases, Judicial Review/Crown Liability on (Updated )

This cased involved a complaint by one group of snow crab fish harvesters who objected to the Minister reducing the quota in their area by 35 per cent. After rejecting a number of grounds of review, the court imposed liability based upon the tort of misfeasance in public office. In doing so, the court remarked that unlike a number of …

Full Summary

Elson v. Canada (Attorney General), 2017 FC 459

In Fish Cases, Judicial Review/Crown Liability on (Updated )

This case involved judicial review of a decision by the Minister of Fisheries (based upon a recommendation of the Atlantic Fisheries Appeal Board) to deny the Applicant’s appeal in which he sought an exemption from the Preserving the Independence of the Inshore Fleet in Canada’s Atlantic Fisheries policy (“PIIFCAF Policy” or Policy). BACKGROUND In 2007 the Minister of Fisheries introduced …

Full Summary

R v. Harris, 2016 CanLii 81499

In Due Diligence, Fish Cases, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved a crab fishing vessel that was required under its licence to have the licence holder or a designated operator on board the fishing vessel at all times when fishing and offloading. When the licence holder could not be on board the fishing vessel because of health reasons, she and her son attempted to have a new crew …

Full Summary

Calwell Fishing Ltd. v. Canada, 2016 FC 1140

In Fish Cases, Fisheries Practice, Judicial Review/Crown Liability on (Updated )

This case was brought by a group of fish packer owners whose businesses declined to the point where they were no longer economically viable. They sought a declaration based upon the common law doctrine of "taking". They argued that the state cannot take property without compensation except where such taking is supported by clear unambiguous statutory language. They submitted that …

Full Summary

R v. McKinnell Fishing Ltd., 2016 BCCA 472

In Fish Cases, Miscellaneous, Offences on (Updated )

This case was summarized by the Court of Appeal as follows: "The appellant crabbing company was found guilty of “fishing for” crabs in closed waters, contrary to the Fisheries Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F 14. It argues that the phrase “fishing for” in s. 2 of the Fisheries Act does not include the act of raising crab traps from the …

Full Summary

Giroux v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FCA 288

In Fish Cases, Judicial Review/Crown Liability on (Updated )

This case involved in group of Scallop Fishers in the Bay of Fundy area who challenged a decision of the Minister of Fisheries of issue licences to another group with licence conditions that allowed them to fish in area SFA 29 West. After setting out the discretionary authority of the Minister, the Motions Court denied the motion on the grounds …

Full Summary

Her Majesty the Queen v. . 100193 P.E.I. Inc. et al., 2016 FCA 280

In Fish Cases, Fisheries Practice, Judicial Review/Crown Liability on (Updated )

This was an appeal and cross appeal from a decision of the Federal Court (2015 FC 932) allowing in part the Appellant/Defendant’s motion for summary judgement to dismiss the Respondent/Plaintiffs’ claims. In their action, the Plaintiffs’ claim included the following: 1) Expropriation without compensation; 2) Breach of contract; 3) Unjust enrichment; and 4) Misfeasance of Public office. The motions Court …

Full Summary

R v. Strickland, 2016 CanLII 2781 (NL PC)

In Due Diligence, Fish Cases, Miscellaneous, Offences, Search and Seizure on (Updated )

This case involved a fisheries officer and two fisheries guardians who were conducting a patrol in a Zodiac when they observed the accused in his dory. Although they were some distance away, they thought they observed him fishing. The fisheries officer motioned for the accused to come over to the fishing vessel, but instead the accused drove his dory on …

Full Summary