Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society v. Copps, 2002 FCA 106

                                                                                                                                            Date: 20020314

                                                                                                                                        Docket: A-658-01

                                                                                                                Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 106

CORAM:        STRAYER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                   CANADIAN PARKS AND WILDERNESS SOCIETY

                                                                                                                                                       Appellant

                                                                                 and

                         SHEILA COPPS, MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE and

                                                  THE THEBACHA ROAD SOCIETY

                                                                                                                                               Respondents

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

STRAYER J.A.

[1]                 I have considered a motion ("Motion #1") by the appellant for the addition of certain paragraphs from memoranda of argument filed in an application for an interlocutory injunction heard and determined prior to the decision of Gibson J. now under appeal. The appellant insists these paragraphs involve factual admissions by the respondents which it must have in the appeal book. The respondents oppose this motion on the basis that the material sought to be included is argument of counsel, not admissions of fact, and is not contemplated for inclusion in the appeal books by Rule 344.

[2]                 I have also considered a motion ("Motion #2") by the respondents which is conditional on Motion #1 not being dismissed. Motion #2 requests that if Motion #1 is not dismissed then the Court should order included in the appeal book not just the two excerpts from the injunction arguments selected by the appellant, but instead the whole of the memoranda of arguments in the injunction hearing as well as the entire transcript thereof, in order to put the two selected passages in context.

[3]                 I am satisfied that none of this material is necessary in the appeal book. The material requested by both parties relate to the injunction proceeding, not the judicial review in which the decision is now under appeal. In my view any statements to be found in paragraph 10 of the respondents' written argument on the injunction are, if anything other than argument, admissions of law which are in no way binding on this Court. Further they have been overtaken by the findings of Gibson J. in paragraphs 54-57 (and perhaps in other parts not provided to me) of his reasons. It is these reasons and such underlying evidence before the Applications Judge as required by the parties which should be in the appeal book, not the arguments of counsel in previous proceedings.

[4]                 I therefore believe that Motion #1 is quite unnecessary and should be dismissed with costs. In these circumstances the respondents have indicated that it is unnecessary to consider Motion "2 and it will be treated as withdrawn without costs.

                                                                                                                                          (s) "B.L. Strayer"          

J.A.

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                             A-658-01

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          

                                     CANADIAN PARKS AND WILDERNESS SOCIETY

                                                                              AND

                                                        SHEILA COPPS AND OTHERS

MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT THE APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

REASONS FOR ORDER BY: STRAYER J.A.

DATED:                                                MARCH 14, 2002

APPEARANCES:

Mr. Timothy J. Howard

FOR THE APPELLANT

Mr. Kirk Lambrecth, Q.C.

FOR THE RESPONDENT,

MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE

Ms. Trina Kondro

FOR THE RESPONDENT,

THEBACHA ROAD SOCIETY

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Sierra Legal Defence Fund

Vancouver, B.C.

FOR THE APPELLANT

Morris A. Roserberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

FOR THE RESPONDENT

MINISTER OF CANADIAN HERITAGE

Ackroyd, Piasta, Roth & Day LLP

Edmonton, Alberta

FOR THE RESPONDENT,

THEBACHA ROAD SOCIETY