This case involved a crab fisherman who exceeded his individual quota for 1999 crab landings and consequently had his 2000 individual quota reduced by an amount equal approximately to his overage in the previous year. In response, the fisherman commenced an action against the Crown seeking damages for the Crown’s “intentional tortuous interference with his economic interests which caused him …
Full SummaryTucker v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), 2001 FCA 384
This case involved an action by a fisherman against the Minister of Fisheries for damages arising from a decision by the Minister requiring the fisherman to elect either to utilize an inshore fishing licence for groundfish or an offshore fishing licence for turbot. In reviewing the Minister’s discretionary power to issue licences under section 7 of the Fisheries Act, the …
Full SummaryJose Pereira E. Hijos, S.A. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2001 FCT 1434
This case involved a damage action against the Federal Government alleging trespass, assault and negligent navigation arising out of the seizure of the Spanish fishing vessel “Estai” on the high seas in 1995. The decision involved a pre-trial application for an order that a Crown official answer a number questions with respect allegations that the Canadian Government was involved in …
Full SummaryHache v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), 2002 FCT 703
This case is the sequel to Aucoin v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) [2001] F.C.J. 1157 (digested herein). Aucoin involved a challenge to a co-management agreement between D.F.O. and the East Coast (zone 12) snow crab fishermen. It is reported that as a result of changes to the Unemployment Insurance Act in 1995, it became apparent that numerous employees …
Full SummaryOak Island International Group Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2003 NSSC 47
This case involved a Nova Scotia corporation involved in the business of fishing for silver hake and selling it to an offshore market. The company alleged that it was injured as a result of : (1) a delay in approving its fishing licence and quota in 1995; (2) it received a shortfall in its quota allocation in 1995; and (3) …
Full SummaryEcology Action Centre Society v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 FCT 1309
This case involved an application to quash a variation order that opened the Georges Bank for fishing by any means, including dragging. The Applicant argued that the variation order was beyond the jurisdiction of the decision maker because the use of draggers would cause damage to fish habitat. At the initial application before a Prothonotary, the applicant tendered seven affidavits …
Full SummaryPereira E. Hijos, S.A. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 FCA 470
This case involved a damage action against the Federal Government alleging trespass, assault and negligent navigation arising out of the seizure of the Spanish fishing vessel “Estai” on the high seas in 1995. The decision involved a pre-trial application for an order that a Crown official answer a number questions with respect allegations that the Canadian Government was involved in …
Full SummaryMercer v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue), 2003 TCC 652
This case dealt the issue of whether or not the common law spouse of an East Coast fish boat owner who worked as a deckhand on his fishing vessel could be considered an employee for the purpose of a section of the Employment Insurance Act that excluded coverage for employees who do not work at arms length from their employers. …
Full SummaryKeating v. Minister of Fisheries, 2002 FCT 1174
This case involved judicial review of a decision of the Minister of Fisheries to deny a fisherman’s request for the reinstatement of his supplementary crab licence. After an appeal to the Atlantic Fisheries Licence Appeal Board, the Board recommended to the Minister that the licence be re-instated based upon extenuation circumstances such as the fisherman’s illiteracy. However, after receiving a …
Full SummaryKeeping v. Canada (Attorney General), 2003 NLCA 21
This case involved a crab fisherman who relied upon a fisheries officer to measure the tonnage of his boat in order to qualify for a fishing licence. In holding the fisheries officer liable in negligence, the trial court found that measuring the depth of a vessel and telling the owner where to place the measuring tape was “not a policy …
Full Summary