Practice
Preliminary Determination of Question of Law
Motion for order precluding appellants from raising certain constitutional questions unless first serving notice of constitutional question in accordance with Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 57 (Act)—Motion arising in appeal from Federal Court decision (2007 FC 955) in which decisions, administrative action regarding environmental assessment of proposed mining operation in northern British Columbia challenged on judicial review—Notice not required in present case since appellants relying on constitutional limits of Parliament’s powers as reason for adopting narrow rather than broad interpretation of ambiguous word “project” in Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, S.C. 1992, c. 37, ss. 18, 21—Presumption of constitutional consistency being employed as interpretative tool, not remedy to reduce constitutionally permitted scope of legislation—Because of difficulty in practice to discern line between using constitutional consistency as interpretative tool, to support “reading down” remedy, open to panel hearing appeal to conclude constitutional division of powers being used to read down meaning of “project”; that in absence of Act, s. 57 notice, Court cannot entertain argument—Motion dismissed.
Miningwatch Canada v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) (A-478-07, 2008 FCA 166, Evans J.A., order dated May 1, 2008, 6 pp.)