PRACTICE |
Affidavits |
Ardoch Algonquin First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General)
T-1274-99
Lemieux J.
12/9/00
6 pp.
Motions arising in context of judicial review of Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) program for delivery of educational, training services to urban, Aboriginal communities--Attorney General making two-pronged motion: (1) for leave to file further supplementary affidavit pursuant to Federal Court Rules, 1998, r. 312; (2) to compel production--Applicants made motion pursuant to r. 316 for authorization to call witnesses to testify at hearing on factual issue relating to how urban Aboriginal communities in Winnipeg, Toronto structured, function, organized, address issues, make decisions, accountable--R. 316 permitting Court in special circumstances to authorize witness to testify in Court in relation to issue of fact raised in application--Applicant urging special circumstances in that oral testimony required to sort out likely contradictions in affidavits, and history, politics of Aboriginal communities not found in books, written materials, but passed on through oral tradition--Attorney General's motion allowed--Applicants agreeing what Attorney General sought relevant, of assistance to Court in determination of case--Applicants' motion denied--Sorting out conflicting evidence in judicial review proceedings not special circumstances--Evidence explaining how urban Aboriginal communities organized, make decisions can be adequately provided in affidavit form--But since important aspect of case, applicants granted leave to file limited evidence on how urban Aboriginal communities function in Winnipeg, Toronto, Niagara Falls--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, rr. 312, 316.