Canada Judgment

Federal Court

McLean v. Canada (Attorney General)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

On consent, the Court ordered Schedule K amended to add or correct the attendance date ranges for Rossville, Quinte Mohawk and Pictou Landing and held that Survivor Class Members who submit claims respecting attendance during the amended periods are subject to section 12.01 of the Settlement Agreement and bound by section 5 of the Settlement Approval Order; no costs were awarded.

Court disposition

Motion granted by consent; Schedule K amended as specified; no costs ordered.

Orders

  • Manitoba, Rossville is amended to include "June 30, 1967 to August 31, 1968"
  • Ontario, Quinte Mohawk is amended to include "September 1, 1955 to August 31, 1960"
  • Nova Scotia, Pictou Landing is amended to correct the closing date from June 30, 1985 to "June 30, 1958"
  • A Survivor Class Member who submits a claim respecting attendance at either Rossville during June 30, 1967 to August 31, 1968 or Quinte Mohawk during September 1, 1955 to August 31, 1960 will be deemed subject to section 12.01 of the Settlement Agreement and will be bound by section 5 of the Settlement Approval Order.
  • No costs ordered.

02

Material facts

Parties

GARRY LESLIE MCLEAN

Plaintiff

ROGER AUGUSTINE

Plaintiff

CLAUDETTE COMMANDA

Plaintiff

ANGELA ELIZABETH SIMONE SAMPSON

Plaintiff

MARGARET ANNE SWAN

Plaintiff

MARIETTE LUCILLE BUCKSHOT

Plaintiff

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA as represented by THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Defendant

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Class Proceeding / Order on Motion to Amend Settlement Agreement Schedule K

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Plaintiffs moved with the consent of the Defendant to amend Schedule K to include revised attendance date ranges for Rossville (Manitoba) and Quinte Mohawk (Ontario) and to correct the closing date for Pictou Landing (Nova Scotia); they sought a declaration that Survivor Class Members who submit claims for attendance during the specified periods will be bound by section 12.01 of the Settlement Agreement and section 5 of the Settlement Approval Order.
Respondent
Defendant consented to the amendments and did not oppose the motion; the Court received no communications in opposition.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Settlement Approval Order and Federal Court inherent jurisdiction (2022 FC 830)

    Court may approve amendments to settlement schedules on consent and correct clerical errors in settlement documents

  2. 02

    Settlement Agreement section 12.01 and Settlement Approval Order section 5

    Claimants whose attendance falls within specified dates are subject to the settlement's binding provisions including section 12.01 and related approval order provisions

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

On consent, the Court ordered Schedule K amended to add or correct the attendance date ranges for Rossville, Quinte Mohawk and Pictou Landing and held that Survivor Class Members who submit claims respecting attendance during the amended periods are subject to section 12.01 of the Settlement Agreement and bound by section 5 of the Settlement Approval Order; no costs were awarded.

Obiter and limits

  • No communications were received for or against the motion.
  • No costs were sought and none was ordered.

Court disposition

Motion granted by consent; Schedule K amended as specified; no costs ordered.

  • Manitoba, Rossville is amended to include "June 30, 1967 to August 31, 1968"
  • Ontario, Quinte Mohawk is amended to include "September 1, 1955 to August 31, 1960"
  • Nova Scotia, Pictou Landing is amended to correct the closing date from June 30, 1985 to "June 30, 1958"
  • A Survivor Class Member who submits a claim respecting attendance at either Rossville during June 30, 1967 to August 31, 1968 or Quinte Mohawk during September 1, 1955 to August 31, 1960 will be deemed subject to section 12.01 of the Settlement Agreement and will be bound by section 5 of the Settlement Approval Order.
  • No costs ordered.

Source and reliance status

Federal Court · 6 June 2022

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Federal Court

Judgment· 6 June 2022

2022 FC 830

McLean v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2022-06-06 Neutral citation 2022 FC 830 File numbers T-2169-16 Decision Content Date: 20220606 Docket: T-2169-16 Citation: 2022 FC 830 Ottawa, Ontario, June 6, 2022 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan

CLASS PROCEEDING BETWEEN: GARRY LESLIE MCLEAN, ROGER AUGUSTINE, CLAUDETTE COMMANDA, ANGELA ELIZABETH SIMONE SAMPSON,

MARGARET ANNE SWAN AND

MARIETTE LUCILLE BUCKSHOT Plaintiffs and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA as represented by THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Defendant

ORDER UPON MOTION made in writing by the Plaintiffs, on consent of the Defendant, for three amendments to Schedule K to the Settlement Agreement in the within action; AND UPON the Court having received no communications for or against the motion; THIS COURT ORDERS that: Schedule K, as attached to the Settlement Approval Order as Appendix A, is amended as follows: Manitoba, Rossville is amended to include “June 30, 1967 to August 31, 1968”; Ontario, Quinte Mohawk is amended to include “September 1, 1955 to August 31, 1960”; and Nova Scotia, Pictou Landing is amended to correct the closing date from June 30, 1985 to “June 30, 1958”. A Survivor Class Member who submits a claim respecting attendance at either of Rossville during the period in 1a. above or Quinte Mohawk during the period in 1b., will be deemed subject to section 12.01 of the Settlement Agreement and will be bound by section 5 of the Settlement Approval Order. As no costs were sought, none is ordered. Blank “Michael L. Phelan” Blank Judge

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.