| Citation: |
Doyon v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FCA 152, [2009] 3 F.C.R. D-9 |
A-513-08 |
Animals
Judicial review of Review Tribunal’s decision (Agriculture and Agri-Food) that applicant violated Health of Animals Regulations, C.R.C., c. 296, s. 138(2)(a), prohibiting transportation of animal when transportation may cause animal undue suffering—Should not be concluded from Canada (Attorney General) v. Porcherie des Cèdres Inc., [2005] 3 F.C.R. 539 (F.C.A.) that slightest suffering existing before transportation will necessarily lead to violation of s. 138(2)(a) if suffering animal transported—Through its actus reus, s. 138(2)(a) not prohibiting transportation of suffering animal to slaughterhouse or permitting transportation of healthy animal in conditions that would cause undue suffering—Tribunal erring in applying Samson v. Canada (Food Inspection Agency), 2005 FCA 235, when assuming that, if suffering at time of loading proven, transportation necessarily resulting in greater, undue suffering—Tribunal ignoring relevant evidence, failing to assess weaknesses, contradictions in prosecution’s evidence; failing to analyse evidence to establish a necessary causal link between transportation, undue suffering—Causal link may be broken if, as in present case, anticipated journey changed by necessity or third party—Tribunal’s verdict unreasonable—Application allowed.
Doyon v. Canada (Attorney General) (A-513-08, 2009 FCA 152, Létourneau J.A., judgment dated May 13, 2009, 22 pp.)