Date: 19990804
Docket: T-1066-99
BETWEEN:
BERNARD JENNISS and
THE MALECITE FIRST NATION OF VIGER
Applicants
- and -
MARTINE JENNISS, SYLVIA JENNISS, PIERRE TREMBLAY
RENÉE TREMBLAY AND DANIELLE TECCA
Respondents
- and -
THE MALECITE FIRST NATION OF VIGER BAND COUNCIL
- and-
THE HONOURABLE JANE STEWART
Third Party
REASONS FOR ORDER
(Delivered from the bench on July 2, 1999, in Québec, Quebec and revised)
BLAIS J.
[1] This is a motion for an injunction against Ms. Renée Tremblay and Ms. Danielle Tecca, both employees of the "Malecite First Nation of Viger" Indian Band.
[2] At the hearing held in Québec on July 2, 1999, the Court dismissed the motion for an injunction from the bench and the Judge indicated that the reasons expressed orally would be recorded in writing.
[3] Several allegations of mismanagement have been lodged against both respondents. A criminal charge was laid against Danielle Tremblay, sister of the respondent Renée Tremblay and also sister of another respondent, Pierre Tremblay. The charge involved payments of cheques co-signed by the respondent Renée Tremblay. An accounting investigation was requested and it is slowly progressing. A police investigation was also instigated and has already resulted in criminal charges.
[4] The Court was informed that a general assembly of members of the Malecite First Nation of Viger would be held on July 3, 1999 and that the respondents Renée Tremblay and Pierre Tremblay and the applicant Bernard Jenniss were all candidates for the position of Grand Chief; the election for this position was scheduled for Sunday July 4, 1999.
Serious question
[5] The applicant demonstrated that there was a serious question to determine.
Irreparable harm
[6] The Court was not presented with convincing evidence that if an injunction was not issued the respondents could cause irreparable harm to the Malecite First Nation of Viger. In fact, the police had already seized the documents available in the offices of the First Nation"s reserve and it appeared that the applicant Bernard Jenniss, Grand Chief, had already ensured that the majority of the useful and available documents were sent to the accountant and the Sûreté du Québec.
[7] Furthermore, according to the evidence before the Court, both employees, whose status is uncertain to say the least, have not been in the Band Council offices since the police search on June 11, 1999.
Balance of convenience
[8] As for the balance of convenience, the third element of the test, given that there is no irreparable harm, it is unnecessary to discuss this third point.
[9] Moreover, I was disappointed to note the absence of representatives of the third party, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, who in a letter dated June 29, 1999, seemed to treat this issue lightly and view it as a private matter, although both the interests of the entire Malecite First Nation of Viger and the third party merited special attention.
CONCLUSION
[10] In conclusion, the motion for an injunction is dismissed with costs in the cause.
Pierre Blais
Judge
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
AUGUST 4, 1999
Certified true translation
Monica F. Chamberlain
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT NO.: T-1066-99
STYLE OF CAUSE: Bernard Jeniss et al. v.
Martine Jeniss et al
PLACE OF HEARING: Québec, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: July 2, 1999
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Blais J.
DATED: August 4, 1999
APPEARANCES:
Paul-Yvan Martin for the applicants
Rino St-Pierre for the respondents
Sylvie D"Amour for the third party
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Martin, Camirand, Pelletier
Montréal, Quebec for the applicants
Boucher & Boucher
Rivière-du-Loup, Quebec for the respondents
Dumas & D"Amours
Rivière-du-Loup, Quebec for the third party
Email this Content