Canada v. Sahtu Secretariat Inc.
Because the parties reached a settlement that included a retroactive amendment excluding the disputed payments from the definition of "royalty," the factual and legal basis of the Trial Division's declaration no longer subsisted and the appeal was allowed by consent, reversing the lower court judgment.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2002 FCA 315
- Parties
- Appellant: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada; Respondent: The Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 10 September 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Motion to Allow Appeal by Consent Following Settlement and Retroactive Amendment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed by consent; judgment of the Trial Division reversed.
- Legal Topics
- Royalties, Land Claim Agreements, Accounting, Settlement by Consent, Retroactive Amendment
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
Appellant
The Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Motion to Allow Appeal by Consent Following Settlement and Retroactive Amendment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether amounts payable under the 1944 Imperial Oil agreement constitute "royalties" under the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement
- 2 Whether the Trial Division's order for an accounting should stand after the parties' settlement and a retroactive amendment to the definition of "royalty"
- 3 Whether an appeal may be allowed by consent where settlement and amendment change the factual and legal basis of the judgment under appeal
Ratio Decidendi
Because the parties reached a settlement that included a retroactive amendment excluding the disputed payments from the definition of "royalty," the factual and legal basis of the Trial Division's declaration no longer subsisted and the appeal was allowed by consent, reversing the lower court judgment.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed by consent; judgment of the Trial Division reversed.
Orders
- Appeal allowed; the Trial Division judgment declaring the 1944 payments to be "royalties" and ordering an accounting is reversed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Canada v. Sahtu Secretariat Inc. Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-09-10 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 315 File numbers A-78-99 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20020910 Docket: A-78-99 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 315 CORAM: Létourneau J.A. Sharlow J.A. Pelletier J.A. BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Appellant and THE SAHTU SECRETARIAT INCORPORATE Respondent Motion dealt with in writing without appearance of parties Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, September 10, 2002 REASONS FOR ORDER BY: SHARLOW J.A. CONCURRED IN BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. PELLETIER J.A. Date: 20020910 Docket: A-78-99 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 315 CORAM: Létourneau J.A. Sharlow J.A. Pelletier J.A. BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Appellant and THE SAHTU SECRETARIAT INCORPORATE Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER Sharlow J.A. [1] In Sahtu Secretariat Inc. v. Canada, (1999), 12 F.T.R. 30, a judge of the Trial Division declared that amounts payable to the Crown pursuant to clause 18 of a certain agreement between the Crown and Imperial Oil Limited dated July 21, 1944 are "royalties" as defined in the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement (the "Sahtu Dene Agreement"), and ordered an accounting of sums payable to the Respondent as a result. The Crown appealed. [2] The hearing of the appeal was scheduled for hearing on May 23, 2000. At the commencement of the hearing, the parties sought an adjournment on the basis that they were pursuing a settlement. The parties have now entered into an agreement pursuant to which the Crown will make a substantial payment to the Respondent, and the definition of "royalty" in the Sahtu Dene Agreement will be amended retroactively to exclude the payments in question. The amendment changes fundamentally the factual basis of the judgment under appeal, and the Respondent has agreed that it should be reversed. Accordingly, the Crown has moved, with the consent of the Respondent, for an order allowing the appeal. The motion will be granted. "K. Sharlow" J.A. "I agree Gilles Létourneau" "I agree J.D.Denis Pelletier" FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-78-99 STYLE OF CAUSE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA and THE SAHTU SECRETARIAT INCORPORATED MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT THE APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS FOR ORDER BY: The Honourable Justice Sharlow DATED: September 10, 2002 WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY: James S. Peacock FOR THE APPELLANT Michael P. Caroll, Q.C. FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON LLP FOR THE APPELLANT BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS CALGARY, ALBERTA DAVIS & COMPANY FOR THE RESPONDENT BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS VANCOUVER, B.C.