Digests

Fisheries

Appeal from Federal Court decision (2008 FC 492) ordering Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to implement 2006 Management Plan for Snow Crab areas 12, 18, 25, 26—Whether Management Plan creating rights which respondents were entitled to enforce against Minister—Minister not having “public legal duty to act”—Management Plan not binding legal document, not enforceable by respondents, can only be viewed as statement, expression of Minister’s intent—Minister’s powers to issue Management Plan stemming from his general authority to manage fishery under Department of Fisheries and Oceans Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-15, s. 4—F.C. erring in law, proceeding on wrong principle of law in finding Minister’s discretion spent when Management Plan approved—Management Plan expression of policy, not decision to grant permits, thus Minister’s discretion not exhausted by approval thereof—Appeal allowed—Per Pelletier J.A. (concurring): Management Plan not single decision, not one-time exercise of discretion—To extent Management Plan representing decisions taken, not a policy, i.e. guide to future decision making—Various rights, duties flowing from each decision taken—No right to given quota, thus no right to compensation arising purely from loss of quota.

Arsenault v. Canada (Attorney General) (A-144-08, 2009 FCA 300, Nadon and Pelletier JJ.A., judgment dated October 20, 2009, 24 pp.)