Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society v. Copps

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society v. Copps Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-03-14 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 106 File numbers A-658-01 Decision Content Date: 20020314 Docket: A-658-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 106 CORAM: STRAYER J.A. BETWEEN: CANADIAN PARKS AND WILDERNESS SOCIETY Appellant and SHEILA COPPS, MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE and THE THEBACHA ROAD SOCIETY Respondents REASONS FOR ORDER STRAYER J.A. [1] I have considered a motion ("Motion #1") by the appellant for the addition of certain paragraphs from memoranda of argument filed in an application for an interlocutory injunction heard and determined prior to the decision of Gibson J. now under appeal. The appellant insists these paragraphs involve factual admissions by the respondents which it must have in the appeal book. The respondents oppose this motion on the basis that the material sought to be included is argument of counsel, not admissions of fact, and is not contemplated for inclusion in the appeal books by Rule 344. [2] I have also considered a motion ("Motion #2") by the respondents which is conditional on Motion #1 not being dismissed. Motion #2 requests that if Motion #1 is not dismissed then the Court should order included in the appeal book not just the two excerpts from the injunction arguments selected by the appellant, but instead the whole of the memoranda of arguments in the injunction hearing as well as the entire transcript thereof, in order to put the two selected passages in context. [3] I am satisfied that none of this material is necessary in the appeal book. The material requested by both parties relate to the injunction proceeding, not the judicial review in which the decision is now under appeal. In my view any statements to be found in paragraph 10 of the respondents' written argument on the injunction are, if anything other than argument, admissions of law which are in no way binding on this Court. Further they have been overtaken by the findings of Gibson J. in paragraphs 54-57 (and perhaps in other parts not provided to me) of his reasons. It is these reasons and such underlying evidence before the Applications Judge as required by the parties which should be in the appeal book, not the arguments of counsel in previous proceedings. [4] I therefore believe that Motion #1 is quite unnecessary and should be dismissed with costs. In these circumstances the respondents have indicated that it is unnecessary to consider Motion "2 and it will be treated as withdrawn without costs. (s) "B.L. Strayer" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-658-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: CANADIAN PARKS AND WILDERNESS SOCIETY AND SHEILA COPPS AND OTHERS MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT THE APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS FOR ORDER BY: STRAYER J.A. DATED: MARCH 14, 2002 APPEARANCES: Mr. Timothy J. Howard FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. Kirk Lambrecth, Q.C. FOR THE RESPONDENT, MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE Ms. Trina Kondro FOR THE RESPONDENT, THEBACHA ROAD SOCIETY SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Sierra Legal Defence Fund Vancouver, B.C. FOR THE APPELLANT Morris A. Roserberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE Ackroyd, Piasta, Roth & Day LLP Edmonton, Alberta FOR THE RESPONDENT, THEBACHA ROAD SOCIETY