This case involved an application to set aside the arrest of a commercial fish packing vessel. The Plaintiff alleged that gillnet herring licences supplied to a herring joint venture for vessels that caught fish and then delivered them to the fish packer were necessaries or services supplied to the packer. The court rejected this argument and struck the in rem part of the plaintiff’s claim for the following two reasons:
Based upon Radil Bros. Fishing Co. v. Canada (2001) 207 D.L.R. (4th) 82 (F.C.A.) (digested herein), the supply of fishing licences is not considered a necessary or services supplied to a ship; and
Even if the fishing licences or the services in providing them could be considered a necessary, they were not supplied to the arrested packing vessel, they were only supplied to the vessels that delivered fish to the packer.