Ojibway Nation of Saugeen v. Derose

Ojibway Nation of Saugeen v. Derose

Each party must bear its own costs because the successful Conduct Review Proponents now control the First Nation (making indemnification unnecessary and effectively funded by ONS), and there was insufficient evidence of abuse of process or other exceptional circumstances to justify ordering costs against the former Chief and Headmen, including a solicitor-client award.

Citation
2022 FC 870
Parties
Applicant in T 221 19; Respondent in T 1192 19: OJIBWAY NATION OF SAUGEEN; Respondent in T 221 19: HILDA DEROSE; Respondent in T 221 19: JOHN MACHIMITY; Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19: RON MACHIMITY SR.; Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19: JOYCE MEDICINE; Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19: BETTY NECAN; Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19: DARLENE NECAN; Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19: DESIREE JACKO; Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Former Chief: EDWARD MACHIMITY; Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Named Successor: VIOLET MACHIMITY; Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Former Headman: EILEEN KEESIC; Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Former Headman: JOHN SAPAY
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Post Judgment Costs Motion
Outcome
Each party will bear its own costs.
Legal Topics
First Nation Governance, Costs Awards, Non Party Costs, Judicial Review
Source Language
English
Indigenous Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Costs Law First Nation Governance Costs Awards Non Party Costs Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OJIBWAY NATION OF SAUGEEN

Applicant in T 221 19; Respondent in T 1192 19

HILDA DEROSE

Respondent in T 221 19

JOHN MACHIMITY

Respondent in T 221 19

RON MACHIMITY SR.

Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19

JOYCE MEDICINE

Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19

BETTY NECAN

Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19

DARLENE NECAN

Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19

DESIREE JACKO

Applicant in T 1192 19; Respondent in T 221 19

EDWARD MACHIMITY

Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Former Chief

VIOLET MACHIMITY

Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Named Successor

EILEEN KEESIC

Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Former Headman

JOHN SAPAY

Named as ONS Representative/respondent in T 1192 19; Former Headman

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Post Judgment Costs Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded against the First Nation (ONS) despite its loss
  2. 2 Whether costs may be ordered against individuals who were not formal parties (former Chief and Headmen)
  3. 3 Whether solicitor-client costs are appropriate in these circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

Each party must bear its own costs because the successful Conduct Review Proponents now control the First Nation (making indemnification unnecessary and effectively funded by ONS), and there was insufficient evidence of abuse of process or other exceptional circumstances to justify ordering costs against the former Chief and Headmen, including a solicitor-client award.

Court Disposition

Each party will bear its own costs.

Orders

  • Each party will bear its own costs.