[2017] 4 F.C.R. D-2
Practice
Parties
Intervention
Motions for leave to intervene in consolidated proceedings by intervener Attorney General of Alberta pursuant to Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 (Rules), r. 110, Tsartlip First Nation (Tsartlip) pursuant to Rules, r. 109 — Applicants in consolidated proceedings seeking to quash certain administrative decisions approving Trans Mountain Expansion Project to expand existing pipeline — Opposing Attorney General of Alberta’s motion for leave to intervene, claiming Alberta failing to satisfy certain prerequisites in rr. 109, 110 — If the applicants’ argument were accepted, attorneys general wishing to intervene would have to satisfy all the prerequisites under rr. 109, 110 while private parties wishing to intervene would have to satisfy only the prerequisites under r. 109 — The Court rejected this argument — R. 110 contemplating special role for Attorneys General in addition to those contemplated under Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 57, Rules, r. 109 — Legislative drafter not intending Attorneys General to face more impediments to intervention than private parties — R. 110 having to be interpreted against backdrop of foundational principles, longstanding constitutional arrangements pertaining to Attorneys General — Attorneys General representing Crown, protecting, advancing public interest — Giving Attorneys General broader right to apply to intervene in order to advance public interest consistent with these foundational principles, constitutional arrangements — R. 110(a),(b) not prerequisites to application for leave to intervene under r.110(c) — Similarly, nothing in r. 110 suggesting that Attorneys General must satisfy prerequisites for intervention in r. 109 — Strong nexus between issues raised in consolidated proceedings on one hand, interests of Government of Alberta, population it serves on other — Attorney General of Alberta thus easily meeting test for intervention under r. 110 — As for Tsartlip’s motion, respondent Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC stating motion improper attempt by Tsartlip to obtain full party status in application for judicial review without filing own judicial review application — Tsartlip in substance bringing application for judicial review in guise of motion to intervene — Cannot apply for judicial review now through mechanism of intervention under r. 109 in expedited proceedings herein — Test to grant extension of time to apply for judicial review not met — Tsartlip suggesting that decision approving Trans Mountain Expansion Project unreasonably affecting their own rights, interests — Intervention under r. 109 not mechanism by which party can challenge decision exactly as an applicant can, but be immunized from potential costs award — Party cannot use r. 109 to join proceedings as co-applicant well after limitation period for applying has passed — Motion brought by Attorney General of Alberta granted; motion brought by Tsartlip dismissed.
Tsleil-Waututh Nation v. Canada (Attorney General) (A-78-17 (lead file), A-217-16, A-218-16, A-223-16, A-224-16, A-225-16, A-232-16, A-68-17, A-73-17, A-74-17, A-75-17, A-76-17, A-77-17, A-84-17, A-86-17, 2017 FCA 102, Stratas J.A., order dated May 15, 2017, 16 pp.)