Date: 20101207
Docket: T-2017-09
Citation: 2010 FC 1226
Ottawa, Ontario, December 7, 2010
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Zinn
BETWEEN:
THERESE VILLENEUVE and BERNADETTE UNKA
ON THEIR OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF
OTHER MEMBERS OF THE
DENINU K’UE FIRST NATION
Applicants
and
VIOLET BEAULIEU, ALICE DEBOER, DENNIS
KING,
HANK MULDER, ROBERT SAYINE, RAYMOND
SIMON,
LOUIS BALSILLIE, GREG BALSILLIE, CAROL
COLLINS,
DAVE PIERROT, PATRICK SIMON, DENINU KU’E
FIRST NATION and
THE MINISTER OF INDIAN AND NORTHERN
AFFAIRS CANADA
Respondents
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
[1]
The applicants seek an extension
of time, pursuant to Rules 8 and 397(1) of the Federal Courts Rules to
serve and file a notice of motion to reconsider my Reasons for Judgment and
Judgment that issued on June 16, 2010.
[2]
If
an extension of time is granted, the relief sought is set out in the Notice of
Motion as follows:
2. Relief in the nature
of clarification and further direction, pursuant to Rule 397(1) of the Federal
Courts Rules, 1998, in respect to the Judgment, in particular with respect
to:
i.
a
mandatory date for an election (hereinafter the “New Election”) for Chief and
Council of the Deninu K’ue First Nation (Hereinafter “DKFN”);
ii.
the
timeline and procedure to govern the New Election;
iii.
the
term of the position of Chief to be filled in the New Election;
iv.
the
councilor positions to be filled in the New Election and for what term;
v.
the
procedures by which DKFN members who do not reside in Fort Resolution (hereinafter the
“non-resident members”) are to be notified of and may vote in the New
Elections, and specifically:
1. that advance polling
stations be established with consideration for location given to the
communities where large numbers of non-resident members reside, including
Yellowknife, Hay River, Fort Smith, and Edmonton; and
2. that procedures be
established whereby non-resident members can vote by proxy;
vi.
the
status of Dave Pierrot as a councilor of DKFN; and
vii.
any
other particulars in relation to the New Election as this Honourable Court
deems necessary;
3. In the alternative,
an Order to set:
i. a
mandatory date for the New Election;
ii. the
timeline and procedure to govern the New Election;
iii.
the
term of the position of Chief to be filled in the New Election;
iv.
the
councilor positions to be filled in the New Election and for what term;
v.
the
procedures by which non-resident members are to be notified of and may vote in
the New Election, and specifically:
1.
that
advance polling stations be established with consideration for location given
to the communities where large numbers of non-resident members reside,
including Yellowknife, Hay River, Fort Smith, and Edmonton; and
2.
that
procedures be established whereby non-resident members can vote by proxy;
vi.
the
status of Dave Pierrot as a councilor of DKFN; and
vii. any other particulars in
relation to the New Election as this Honourable Court deems necessary;
4. Costs of
this motion on a solicitor and his own client basis.
[3]
The ten-day period provided in
Rule 397 within which to bring a motion to reconsider is short and it is so, in
part, because this Rule is meant to permit the Court to correct irregularities
or omissions in judgments, not to request that further orders be made when one
party is alleged to have failed to comply with a judgment.
[4]
It
is evident from their Written Representations that the applicants’ principal main
complaint is that the Deninu K’ue First Nation (DKFN) has not set an election
date. In my Reasons for Judgment, I stated: “In light of my finding that the
election held in November 2009 was invalid, Council ought to call an election
for the position of Chief and those councilors who have already served a term
of four years.” An election date of February 8, 2011, has now been set. There
was no request in the Notice of Application filed by the applicants to set a
mandatory date for an election and it would be improper for the Court to consider
doing so now.
[5]
The
applicants have received the essence of what they are seeking in their motion
to reconsider: a fixed election date. The Election Regulations and my
observation in my Reasons for Judgment that the current Council members, as
defined in the Judgment, retain their positions until the next election, provide
a complete answer to the other relief requested.
[6]
The
concerns raised by the applicants relating to the fairness of the election are completely
speculative.
[7]
I
find that the motion to reconsider has no merit, and accordingly, I do not exercise
my discretion to extend the time limit in Rule 397: Canada (Attorney General) v
Hennelly,
[1999] F.C.J. No. 846 (C.A.). Even if the Court were inclined to extend the
time limit, the motion would be dismissed.
[8]
The
respondents, other than the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, are
awarded their costs of this motion which I fix at $1,000.00, inclusive of fees,
disbursements and taxes.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that this motion is dismissed with costs payable to the
respondents, other
than the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, fixed at $1,000.00, inclusive
of fees, disbursements and taxes.
“Russel W. Zinn”
Email this Content