Fontaine v. Canada (Attorney General)

Fontaine v. Canada (Attorney General)

The motions to stay the Order appointing an Independent Special Advisor and for an interim preservation order were dismissed because the Order Under Appeal is probably interlocutory such that this court likely lacks jurisdiction on the appeal, the moving parties failed to demonstrate irreparable harm from refusal of the stay, and the balance of convenience favoured allowing the St. Anne’s Review to proceed; additionally, a preservation order was unnecessary because Canada had undertaken to preserve relevant documents and the issue is before the supervising judge in ongoing proceedings.

Citation
2021 ONCA 313
Parties
Plaintiffs: Larry Philip Fontaine et al.; Defendants (respondents): The Attorney General of Canada et al.; Requestors (appellants/moving Parties): Dr. Edmund Metatawabin and IAP Claimants T-00185, S-20774, S-16753
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Class Proceedings Under the Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement (irssa); Request for Directions Under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 / Motions for Stay Pending Appeal and Interim Preservation Order Following Appointment of an Independent Special Advisor; Appeal Filed
Outcome
Motions dismissed. Stay pending appeal denied. Interim preservation order denied.
Legal Topics
Independent Assessment Process (iap), Disclosure Obligations, Appointment of Independent Special Advisor (isa) / Referee, Stay Pending Appeal, Preservation of Documents, Recusal and Judicial Impartiality, Court Administration Protocol (cap)
Source Language
English
Civil Administrative Law Class Actions Aboriginal/indigenous Law Procedural Law Independent Assessment Process (iap) Disclosure Obligations Appointment of Independent Special Advisor (isa) / Referee +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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Larry Philip Fontaine et al.

Plaintiffs

The Attorney General of Canada et al.

Defendants (respondents)

Dr. Edmund Metatawabin and IAP Claimants T-00185, S-20774, S-16753

Requestors (appellants/moving Parties)

Procedural Posture

Class Proceedings Under the Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement (irssa); Request for Directions Under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 / Motions for Stay Pending Appeal and Interim Preservation Order Following Appointment of an Independent Special Advisor; Appeal Filed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant a stay pending appeal of the Order appointing an Independent Special Advisor (ISA) to review certain St. Anne’s IAP claims
  2. 2 Whether an interim preservation order preventing destruction of documents should be issued
  3. 3 Whether the Order Under Appeal is final or interlocutory and thus within this court’s jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The motions to stay the Order appointing an Independent Special Advisor and for an interim preservation order were dismissed because the Order Under Appeal is probably interlocutory such that this court likely lacks jurisdiction on the appeal, the moving parties failed to demonstrate irreparable harm from refusal of the stay, and the balance of convenience favoured allowing the St. Anne’s Review to proceed; additionally, a preservation order was unnecessary because Canada had undertaken to preserve relevant documents and the issue is before the supervising judge in ongoing proceedings.

Court Disposition

Motions dismissed. Stay pending appeal denied. Interim preservation order denied.

Orders

  • The motions for a stay pending appeal of the Order Under Appeal and for an interim preservation order are dismissed.
  • If the responding party (Canada) seeks costs, it shall provide written submissions not to exceed 3 pages, accompanied by a bill of costs, within 10 court days of receipt of this decision.