Sunday, August 31, 2014

COMMERCIAL SALMON HALIBUT FISHING Case - Burnell v Canada (Attorney General)

COMMERCIAL SALMON HALIBUT FISHING

Case Name:
Burnell v Canada (Attorney General)


Court:
Supreme Court of British Columbia


Date Filed:
November 20, 2007


Class Members:
All owners of fishing vessels with a Category L Commercial Halibut License to fish for halibut issued by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (“Licensed Vessels”) at any time between 2001 and 2006 inclusive who purchased quota from the Pacific Halibut Management Association (“PHMA”) except for the following:
(i) the holder of license L-437;
(ii) First Nations fishers holding Category FL Commercial Halibut  Fishing licenses; and,
(iii) members of the subclass.


Subclass Members:
All owners of fishing vessels with a Category L Commercial Halibut License to fish for halibut issued by the Minster of Fisheries and Oceans (“Licensed Vessels”) between 2001 and 2006 inclusive (the “Material Time”) for which quota was purchased from PHMA and:
(a) who at any time during the Material Time:
i. were directors of PHMA; or,
ii. were corporations in which a PHMA director owned more than 50% of the shares; or
(b) who claim that they were in a partnership with a PHMA director in relation to a Licensed Vessel and the purchase of quota from PHMA at any time during the Material Time.


Summary of Claim
A class action has been certified which alleges that a Department of Fisheries and Oceans scheme to divert individual vessel quota (IVQ) representing 10% of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) to the Pacific Halibut Management Association for resale back to individual commercial halibut license holders was unlawful and seeks restitution on behalf of members of the Class and Subclass for additional amounts paid by them for the diverted IVQ.


Copies of the Reasons for Judgment of the Supreme Court of British Columbia may be viewed by clicking the following links:
  • Interim Ruling on Causes of Action
  • Second Interim Ruling on Causes of Action
  • Third Interim Ruling: Certification and Amendments to Claim
  • Fourth Interim Ruling: Subclass Certification
Important Documents:
  • Third Amended Notice of Civil Claim
  • Certification Order – February 18, 2014
  • Subclass Certification Order – June 13, 2014 (not yet entered)
Co-counsel:
The lawyers for the class action who represent the main class are Camp Fiorante Matthews Mogerman and Ellis Business Law.
The lawyers for the class action who represent the sub-class are Underhill Boies Parker (www.ubplaw.ca).

For further information concerning this action, please contact Lise Carmichael at 1-800-689-2322 or 604-689-7555, or email lcarmichael@cfmlawyers.ca.

No comments: