Haché v. Canada (Fisheries and Oceans)

Haché v. Canada (Fisheries and Oceans) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-08-17 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 282 File numbers A-265-06, A-286-06, A-287-06 Decision Content Date: 20060817 Dockets: A-265-06, A-286-06, A-287-06 Citation: 2006 FCA 282 Present : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PELLETIER BETWEEN: Aurélien Haché, Lucien Chiasson, Sylvie Chiasson, Armand Fiset, Jeannot Guignard, Héliodore Aucoin, Gildard Haché, Guy Haché, Rhéal Haché, Robert F. Haché, Greg Hinkley, Vincent Jones, Solange Lanteigne, Jean-Pierre LeBouthillier, Rhéal H. Mallet, André Mazerolle, Eddy Mazerolle, Albanie Noël, Alphé Noël, Serge C. Noël, Gilles Noël, Joseph A. Noël, Lévi Noël, Lorenzo Noël, Martin Noël, Mathurin Noël, Nicolas Noël, Onésime Noël, Paul Noël, Raymond Noël, Renald Noël, Robert Ross, Bruno Roussel, Jean-Camille Roussel, Valmi Roussel, Donat Vinennau, Fernand Vienneau, Rhéal Vienneau, Mathias Roussel, Serge Blanchard, Robert Boucher, Elide Bulger, Jean-Gilles Chiasson, Roméo G. Cormier, Bernard Duguay, Thomas Duguay, Donald Duguay, Edgar Ferron, Wilbert Godin, Aurèle Godin, Valois Goupil, Euclide Guinard, Florent Guignard, Jacques E. Haché, Jean-Pierre Haché, Robert G. Haché, Donald R. Haché, Ulysse Haché, Gaetan H. Haché, Gabriel Jean, Jean-Victor Larocque, Dassisse Mallet, Delphis Mallet, Albert A. Noël, Gilles A. Noël, Domitien Paulin, Sylvain Paulin, Alma Robichaud, Administrator of the Estate of Jean-Pierre Robichaud, Sylva Haché, Mario Savoie, Les Pêcheries Jimmy L. Ltée, Eric Gionet, Trustee of Allain O. Gionet, Les Produits Belle-Baie ltée, Oliva Roussel, E. Gagnon et Fils ltée, Bernard Arsenault, Gérard Cassivi, Jacques Collin, Raymond Collin, Robert Collin, Marc Couture, Les Crustacées de Gaspé ltée, 2973-1288 Québec Inc., 2973‑0819 Québec Inc., Bruno Duguay, Charles-Aimé Duguay, Alban Hautcoeur, Fernand Hautcoeur, Jean-Claude Haucoeur, Robert Huard, Christian Lelièvre, Elphège Lelièvre, Jean-Élie Lelièvre, Jules Lelièvre, Jean‑Marc Marcoux, Douglas McInnis, Roger Pinel, Jean‑Marc Sweeny, Michel Turbide, Réal Turbide, Pêcheries Denise Quinn Syvrais Inc., Steven Roussy, Geneviève Allain, Francis Parisé, Martial LeBlanc, Daniel Desbois, Rolland Anglehart, Jacques Langis, Jean-Pierre Huard, Claude Gionet, Carol Dugay, Denis Duguay, Paul Chevarie, Thérèse Vigneau, Administrator of the Estate of Benoît Poirier, Denis Éloquin, Claude Poirier, Henry-Fred Poirier, Robert Thériault and Raynald Vigneau Appellants and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of Human Resources and Development Canada Respondent Motion in writing decided without appearance of the parties. Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on August 17, 2006. REASONS FOR ORDER BY: PELLETIER J.A. Date: 20060817 Dockets: A-265-06, A-286-06, A-287-06 Citation: 2006 FCA 282 Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PELLETIER ENTRE : Aurélien Haché, Lucien Chiasson, Sylvie Chiasson, Armand Fiset, Jeannot Guignard, Héliodore Aucoin, Gildard Haché, Guy Haché, Rhéal Haché, Robert F. Haché, Greg Hinkley, Vincent Jones, Solange Lanteigne, Jean-Pierre LeBouthillier, Rhéal H. Mallet, André Mazerolle, Eddy Mazerolle, Albanie Noël, Alphé Noël, Serge C. Noël, Gilles Noël, Joseph A. Noël, Lévi Noël, Lorenzo Noël, Martin Noël, Mathurin Noël, Nicolas Noël, Onésime Noël, Paul Noël, Raymond Noël, Renald Noël, Robert Ross, Bruno Roussel, Jean-Camille Roussel, Valmi Roussel, Donat Vinennau, Fernand Vienneau, Rhéal Vienneau, Mathias Roussel, Serge Blanchard, Robert Boucher, Elide Bulger, Jean-Gilles Chiasson, Roméo G. Cormier, Bernard Duguay, Thomas Duguay, Donald Duguay, Edgar Ferron, Wilbert Godin, Aurèle Godin, Valois Goupil, Euclide Guinard, Florent Guignard, Jacques E. Haché, Jean-Pierre Haché, Robert G. Haché, Donald R. Haché, Ulysse Haché, Gaetan H. Haché, Gabriel Jean, Jean‑Victor Larocque, Dassisse Mallet, Delphis Mallet, Albert A. Noël, Gilles A. Noël, Domitien Paulin, Sylvain Paulin, Alma Robichaud, Administrator of the Estate of Jean-Pierre Robichaud, Sylva Haché, Mario Savoie, Les Pêcheries Jimmy L. Ltée, Eric Gionet, Trustee of Allain O. Gionet, Les Produits Belle-Baie ltée, Oliva Roussel, E. Gagnon et Fils ltée, Bernard Arsenault, Gérard Cassivi, Jacques Collin, Raymond Collin, Robert Collin, Marc Couture, Les Crustacées de Gaspé ltée, 2973-1288 Québec Inc., 2973-0819 Québec Inc., Bruno Duguay, Charles-Aimé Duguay, Alban Hautcoeur, Fernand Hautcoeur, Jean-Claude Haucoeur, Robert Huard, Christian Lelièvre, Elphège Lelièvre, Jean-Élie Lelièvre, Jules Lelièvre, Jean‑Marc Marcoux, Douglas McInnis, Roger Pinel, Jean -Marc Sweeny, Michel Turbide, Réal Turbide, Pêcheries Denise Quinn Syvrais Inc., Steven Roussy, Geneviève Allain, Francis Parisé, Martial LeBlanc, Daniel Desbois, Rolland Anglehart, Jacques Langis, Jean-Pierre Huard, Claude Gionet, Carol Dugay, Denis Duguay, Paul Chevarie, Thérèse Vigneau, Administrator of the Estate of Benoît Poirier, Denis Éloquin, Claude Poirier, Henry-Fred Poirier, Robert Thériault and Raynald Vigneau Appellants and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Department of Human Resources and Development Canada Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER PELLETIER J.A. [1] The appellants are appealing three decisions of the Federal Court dated June 19, 2006: - An order dismissing the appellants’ action (A-287-06); - An order dismissing the conflict of interest motion regarding the law firm of Patterson Palmer (A-286-06); - An order quashing the direction to attend for witness Douglas Young (A-265-06). [2] After submitting the notice of appeal, the appellants filed a motion to join the three proceedings and have them heard jointly or separately. Alternatively, the appellants requested that the proceedings in A-286-06 and A-265-06 be stayed until the Court renders its judgment in A‑287‑06, because the dismissal of this appeal would render the proceedings in A-286-06 and A‑265-06 moot. As an accessory measure, the appellants requested that the time limits specified in section 343 of the Rules be extended until the Court rules on the motion. [3] Her Majesty the Queen consents to a stay of proceedings in A-286-06 and A-265-06 until the Court rules on A-287-06. She also consents to the extension of time requested by the appellants, without costs, because she did not have the chance to consent before the motion was served and filed. [4] Respondent Douglas Young, who is only involved in the proceedings in A-265-06, consented to the proceedings being joined and heard successively. Accordingly, he does not have to take a position concerning the alternative remedy, the stay of proceedings in A-286-06 and A-265-06, but he consented to the extension of time pending the Court’s decision on the motion. [5] Although the respondents state that they would agree to the order requested by the appellants, they do not agree on the order to be made. Nevertheless, it is obvious that they agree that the Court should deal with the motion expeditiously. [6] The Court cannot order a stay of the proceedings in A-286-06 and A-265-06 pending a judgment in the main proceeding, A-287-06, because that would make A-286-06 moot. The appellants object to the fact that the law firm of Patterson Palmer is representing Her Majesty the Queen, alleging a conflict of interest. Unless the appellants discontinue their motion (and their appeal in A-286-06), this matter must be decided before the main appeal; otherwise, the appeal in A-286-06 will become moot, the lawyers from the law firm of Patterson Palmer having pleaded the case on the merits in spite of the appellants’ objections. [7] Accordingly, the three appeals must be heard in the following order: A-286-06, A-287-06 and A-265-06. There does not seem to be any advantage in joining these three files. Although the three appeals have a common procedural history, the issues raised are distinct and are based on different facts. [8] The facts giving rise to the allegation of conflict of interest do not depend on the facts underlying the action and the main appeal. Likewise, the legal principles invoked in the main appeal have nothing to do with the law concerning the summoning of witnesses or with conflict of interest issues relating to lawyers. It is sufficient for these proceedings to be heard successively before the same Court panel. [9] Therefore, it is not necessary to join these proceedings. However, the three cases will be heard successively before the same Court panel in the following order: A-286-06, A-287-06, A‑265‑06, without costs. “J.D. Denis Pelletier” J.A. Certified true translation Michael Palles FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKETS: A-265-06, A-286-06, A-287-06 STYLE OF CAUSE: Aurélien Haché et al. and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada WRITTEN MOTION DECIDED WITHOUT THE APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES REASONS FOR ORDER BY: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PELLETIER DATED: August 17, 2006 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Brigitte Sivret FOR THE APPELLANTS Dominique Gallant Alain Préfontaine FOR THE RESPONDENT HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA FOR THE RESPONDENT DOUGLAS YOUNG SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Brigitte Sivret Bathurst, N.B. FOR THE APPELLANTS John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA FOR THE RESPONDENT DOUGLAS YOUNG