[2012] 4 F.C.R. D-1
Aboriginal Peoples
Judicial review of respondent’s decision to appoint third-party manager (TPM) to applicant due to alleged default under Comprehensive Funding Agreement—Applicant experiencing serious, unprecedented housing crisis on reserve, informing respondent lacking resources, capacity to address housing crisis—Despite producing no evidence of mismanagement or incorrect spending, respondent notifying applicant of its default of Comprehensive Funding Agreement, appointing TPM—While there was “default” under Comprehensive Funding Agreement, remedy selected (appointment of TPM), unreasonable—Decision to appoint TPM not responding in reasonable way to root of problems at Attawapiskat nor to remedies available upon default under Comprehensive Funding Agreement—Respondent invoking financial management remedy without considering more reasonable, more responsive or less invasive remedies available—Respondent misunderstanding nature of problem, choosing financial tool in form of TPM to address operational problem—While applicant having trouble addressing housing crisis, lacking not ability to manage finances, but material means to do so—Although courts having to show deference to Minister’s choice of remedy, decision to appoint TPM, remedy chosen not reasonable where not responding to problem—Application allowed.
Attawapiskat First Nation v. Canada (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development) (T-2037-11, 2012 FC 948, Phelan J., judgment dated August 1, 2012, 31 pp.)