Tourville v. Fontaine

Tourville v. Fontaine

Extension refused because the appeal lacked merit: the adjudicator's adverse credibility and reliability findings were determinative and within a reasonable range of outcomes; no 'very exceptional circumstance' or patent disregard of the IAP model was shown; the asserted new evidence would not have changed the credibility assessment and would not meet the Palmer test; there is no statutory or common law basis to transfer the appeal to another appellate jurisdiction; therefore interests of justice do not favour a further review.

Citation
2017 BCCA 325
Parties
Appellant (claimant): J. Alphonse Tourville; Respondent (plaintiff): Larry Philip Fontaine et al; Respondent (plaintiff): Attorney General for Canada et al
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Supreme Court Order Under the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (irssa) / IAP (class Proceedings) / Application for Extension of Time to Perfect Appeal and Related Motions (disclosure, Transfer, Fresh Evidence)
Outcome
Application dismissed; extension of time to perfect appeal denied
Legal Topics
Independent Assessment Process (iap), Judicial Recourse Under IRSSA, Extension of Time to Appeal, Disclosure Obligations, Transfer of Proceedings, Fresh Evidence (palmer), Conflict of Interest of Counsel
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Appellate Procedure Class Actions Indigenous Law Evidence and Disclosure Independent Assessment Process (iap) Judicial Recourse Under IRSSA Extension of Time to Appeal +4 more

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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J. Alphonse Tourville

Appellant (claimant)

Larry Philip Fontaine et al

Respondent (plaintiff)

Attorney General for Canada et al

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Supreme Court Order Under the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (irssa) / IAP (class Proceedings) / Application for Extension of Time to Perfect Appeal and Related Motions (disclosure, Transfer, Fresh Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of time to perfect the appeal should be granted
  2. 2 Whether the BC Western Administrative Judge had jurisdiction to hear the RFD
  3. 3 Whether Canada's non-disclosure of documents for St. Anne's IAP claimants amounted to exceptional circumstances warranting judicial recourse

Ratio Decidendi

Extension refused because the appeal lacked merit: the adjudicator's adverse credibility and reliability findings were determinative and within a reasonable range of outcomes; no 'very exceptional circumstance' or patent disregard of the IAP model was shown; the asserted new evidence would not have changed the credibility assessment and would not meet the Palmer test; there is no statutory or common law basis to transfer the appeal to another appellate jurisdiction; therefore interests of justice do not favour a further review.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; extension of time to perfect appeal denied

Orders

  • The application for an extension of time to perfect the appeal is dismissed.
  • No order compelling Canada to file POI reports or additional St. Anne's documents as sought.