This is a fairly lengthy decision involving a large number of counts of allegations of intentional illegal fishing. The accused was convicted of all but two of the counts primarily on the basis of texts taken from a cell phone in his possession at the time of arrest.
Full SummaryR v. Langan, 2013 SKQB 256
Malcolm v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries), 2014 FCA 130
This case involved a representative proceeding brought by the applicant on behalf of all commercial halibut licence holders in British Columbia. The applicant sought judicial review of a decision of the Minister of Fisheries changing the allocation of the total allowable catch (“TAC”) of halibut between the commercial sector and the recreational sector from 88% (commercial)/12% (recreational) to 85%/15%. In …
Full SummaryK'omok First Nation v. Canada (A.G.), 2012 FC 1160
This cased involved a challenge by the K’omoks First Nation (“FN”) with respect to the granting of four aqua-culture licences issued to non-members of the FN in its claimed traditional territory in 2010 shortly after the Federal Government took over jurisdiction for regulating aqua-culture following the Morton decision. It also involved a challenge to the Minister of renewal of these …
Full SummaryKwicksutaineuk Ah-kw A-mish First Nation v. Canada (A.G.) et al., 2012 FC 517
This was an application for judicial review that was a direct consequence of the Morton decision that held the provincial regulatory regime over fin fish aquaculture was constitutionally invalid. As a result of this decision, the federal government was given one year to consider and put into place a regulatory regime over aquaculture in B.C. This meant approximately 680 provincial …
Full SummaryR v. v. Crane
This case involved four charges including a charge of possession of undersized lobster. The issue in this case was whether the Department of Fisheries (DFO) breached the accused’s charter rights by failing to provide the accused with an adequate photographic record of the measuring of the undersized lobster that were returned to the sea after being measured. In concluding that …
R v. Arbuckle, 2013 NSSC 2
This case involved a charge under s. 44 of the Atlantic Fisheries Regulations for possession of undersize herring that was incidental catch. S. 44 of the Atlantic Fishery Regulations provided: 44. (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (4), no person shall fish for, buy, sell or have in his possession any herring that is less than 26.5 cm in length. …
Full SummaryTremblett v. Tremblett, 2012 CanLII 67443
This case involved two brothers who fished together in Newfoundland for a period of 17 years. Initially they fished for groundfish and borrowed money together to purchase a vessel that they jointly owned. When government policy would not allow a partnership to hold a fishing licence, a valuable crab licence was put solely in the name of one brother. Upon …
Full SummaryGaudet v. Dugas, 2013 NBQB 355, 2014 NBCA 7
Hogan v. Buote, 2012 PESC 10
The issue in this case was the apportionment of liability for a collision involving two fishing vessels. One vessel, under the command of Hogan, was in the process of laying lobster traps in a northerly direction while the other vessel, under the command of Buote, was proceeding westerly. Buote argued the collision was Hogan’s fault as Buote had the right …
Full Summary