Halibut: Bad News

Going back to my original question - What, exactly, would "the case" be all about? A bigger % of quota? An end to the quota system entirely? Something else? What? It is crucial to have a very clear, precise statement of objective before any court action can occur. I don't see that yet.

You also need someone or some organization with standing to step forward as the plaintiff. Who would that be?

IMO the end to the quota system entirely. THe whole idea that someone owns fish that arent already caught is the real problem. As far as who? i dont know. The guides and lodges arent going to do it i dont think. And the idea of the whole rec community banding together although sounds great probably isnt real. IMO not all but some have the idea that by the time this gets really brutal(IMO its already there) and the rec group gets nothing, or maybe even ends up like the east coast where there is basically zero fishing in the ocean for sporties. They will be retired and its someone else's problem. IM young, got the time, patience, and energy, just dont have the money.
 
Going back to my original question - What, exactly, would "the case" be all about? A bigger % of quota? An end to the quota system entirely? Something else? What? It is crucial to have a very clear, precise statement of objective before any court action can occur. I don't see that yet.

You also need someone or some organization with standing to step forward as the plaintiff. Who would that be?
I see it as a case of protecting a resource that belongs to ALL Canadians, not just a few that have access to it through commercial quota's that someone gave them! I don't recall anyone asking if I or any other of the Canadian populace were okay with it!
 
Learn About Class Actions


A class action is a lawsuit which provides a means to a large group of people with common legal issues to collectively bring a claim against the same defendant.
This powerful legal procedure enables a member of a group, the " representative plaintiff", to bring a civil lawsuit on behalf of many similarly situated people, the "class members", without the necessity to obtain the consent of each class member. All the members who have not opt-out of the class are bound by the ultimate ruling by the Court, whether it is adverse or favourable.
Some specific situations are best suited for class actions, such as:
Consumer protection
Employment and Pension plans
Environment
Business practices
Price fixing
Products liability
Pharmaceutical
Securities
If you have suffered some physical or economic harm and you believe that there may be others like yourself, class actions can be the solution to receive a compensation for your injury or loss.
Class actions allow a representative member to bring a lawsuit on the behalf of all the persons similarly situated who have been injured by the same wrong by the same defendant. By aggregating claims, ordinary persons are given the means to pursue their rights and fight against wrongdoers, which are generally large, multinational corporations, public institutions or even governments.
If you are described by the class, you are automatically deemed to be part of it. There is no fee to become a class member and no legal fees to pay since in most cases, class counsels agree to be paid only if the class action is successful directly from the amounts awarded by the courts. Furthermore, there is practically no responsibility to assume as the lawsuit is ongoing and you can be compensated by the effects of a favourable judgment or settlement.


http://www.myclassaction.ca/learn/#.T0AyCk4gekc
 
WHY I SHOULD PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS ACTION?

Participating in a class action is effective, low risk and low cost manner to access to the justice. Since class actions are brought on the behalf of hundreds or even thousands of people, it eliminates the economic barriers and provides a greater bargaining power to the injured parties against defendants that often have significant resources.
Class actions have many advantages over conventional lawsuits:
Class actions are economically effective since they run mostly on contingency basis. Most class counsels agree to be paid only when the class action is successful, directly from the proceeds of a settlement or a judgment. Therefore, the class members are not required to make any payments.

Class actions create strength in numbers by providing a greater bargaining power to the injured parties against defendants with significant resources and a mechanism for pursuing claims of relatively small money values.

Class actions allow people to file collectively a claim when individually they cannot afford to do so.

Class action place very few obligations on class members: they are usually not required to provide any documentation or to testify until the case is resolved.

Class actions are cost effective and increase judicial efficiency since they avoid the necessity of several plaintiffs to file similar individual lawsuits.

Class actions ensure that plaintiffs with similar claims are treated similarly which helps to avoid contradictory rulings.

Class proceeding legislation contains safeguards to ensure that the rights of class members are protected. For instance, any attorney fees agreement or a settlement must be reviewed and approved by the Court.

HOW TO JOIN A CLASS ACTION? WHO CAN BE A MEMBER OF A CLASS ACTION?

In most jurisdictions, as in Ontario, Quebec or British Columbia, class members are not required to do anything to participate in an ongoing or active class proceeding claim. Members are automatically included in the class action lawsuit if they meet the definition of the class provided by the Court, unless they elect to opt-out.
HOW CAN I OPT OUT OF A CLASS ACTION?

When a class action is certified, a notice is published to inform the class members about the certification, the lawsuit and the process for opting out of the class action.
A class member can elect to not participate in the class action by opting out within the terms and the deadline provided in the notification. Once excluded, the person will not be bound by any settlement or judgment of the class action and will no longer be eligible to receive any payment from a settlement or monetary rewards as a result of any judgment. However, the person will be allowed to sue the defendant individually on his own claim within the limitation period prescribed by the law.
HOW DOES A CLASS ACTION WORK?

There are three principal stages in a class action:
Certification Motion. The Court first evaluates if the claim meets all the criteria to be prosecuted as a class action. The analysis takes place in a certification hearing.

The requirements are:

The claim must disclose a proper cause of action and an identifiable class;
There must be issues of fact or law common to all class members;
The class proceeding must be preferable procedure for resolution of the common issues;
There must be a suitable representative plaintiff to act on behalf of the rest class members.

Class Action and Merits. Upon the certification, the Court decides on the common issues and adjudicates the merits of the class action.

Distribution or Individual Claim. Once a damages award has been made, the Court decides the most appropriate way for it to be distributed, whether collectively or individually.

If the evidence establishes with sufficient accuracy the total damages entitled by the class members, the Court orders the defendant to pay the amount covering the class members' claim. The class members whether they actually participated or not in the common issues trial, will receive their pro rata share of the monetary award distributed.

In some cases, however, it will be necessary that each class member produce their claim and establish the value of the damages through mini-trials or other streamlined process to resolve individual issues not decided at the merits stage in order to be entitled to compensation.
DO I PAY TO BE A MEMBER OF A CLASS ACTION? HOW DO THE LEGAL FEES WORK?

There is no fee to become member of a class action.
The Representative plaintiff usually convenes of an agreement with class counsel with respect to legal fees and disbursements. In most cases, class counsels are paid on a contingency basis, which means that there will be no fees until the class action is resolved successfully. Such legal fees are calculated on a percentage and paid directly from the total of the proceeds of a settlement of a judgment. The class members are not required to make any payment even when the class action is not successful.
Any agreement as to the attorney fees are subject to court review and approval which ensure that all fees are fair and reasonable.
HOW LONG A CLASS ACTION USUALLY TAKES TO GET RESOLVED?

Since class actions are generally brought against large corporations and involve complex legal issues, they can take several years to settle. Fortunately, class members have very few responsibilities while a claim is ongoing.

http://www.myclassaction.ca/faq/#.T0A0y04gekc
 
The resource is owned by the people of Canada.
The government is mandated to manage the resource on behalf, and for the benefit of all Canadians.
Has the government stepped beyond it's mandate?
I think so because I am told there is no fish for you when clearly there is lots.
There is, in fact, so much fish that Canada exports 80% of what is harvested here.
So the fact is everyone in the world (that has the money) comes before the needs of Canadians.
GLG
 
Don't mean to sound disrespectful, but this is crazy talk. Just be careful what you wish for. You can have fun with your hali quota if you lost that class action law suit. The new law of toy land would be set in stone once there is a court decision. No other options. DFO would just waive that decision in your faces. Really think about what you are taking on and the pandora's box you may open.

Better to sit back, weigh our options and make a plan based thoughtfully planning out our actions.
 
Did a little checking around - one of my buddies researched the TAC and completed a calculation to see how this year will compare to last season.

He figures our TAC is figured out by adding the wastage figures in the commercial fishery to the Canadian tac = 7.038 plus BAWM and wastage 032 in hook and line = 193,000

The figure to work from is now 7,231,000 to multiply by 15%. Our tac then should be 1,084,650 lbs.

100,000 less than last year.

Let's also compare the weather and ability to get out off shore to fish hali. Last year we had great weather for the summer and catch numbers were very high. This season if there are a few storms like a normal year we should close around the same time on the water as last season.

All the more reason for us to get more facts before we start making decisions and taking actions that we may regret later.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i am not a lawyer and i don't play on on the internet, with that disclaimer let me ask a simple question:

is DFO authorized to make the allocation decision they have made?

your implying that it was not a 'legal' move for them to make this decision. if the answer to the above question is not a clear and resounding NO, i would guess your are wasting your time and energy.
 
Don't mean to sound disrespectful, but this is crazy talk. Just be careful what you wish for. You can have fun with your hali quota if you lost that class action law suit. The new law of toy land would be set in stone once there is a court decision. No other options. DFO would just waive that decision in your faces. Really think about what you are taking on and the pandora's box you may open.

Better to sit back, weigh our options and make a plan based thoughtfully planning out our actions.

Respectfully.... You really think we would lose dont you? Or is it the fact that we "might" lose that we shouldnt try at all? Holy cow, the only crazy talk going on is that we should just take it up the rear every year and twiddle are thumbs. Or the fact that we should have the "well something is better then nothing attitude: I have been replying 100% based on emotion in this thread. No facts what so ever. I really have no clue if we have a case or not.But, I do also know that neither does anyone i else. I for one am sick and tired of sitting back and "weighing our options" only to be ***** slapped every spring. I think it is also important to note that i have caught 4 halibut in my life. This is 100% a prinicipal thing nothing else.

The government made a promise to give us stability in our season and fix the unfair allocation policy. As per your numbers we get 100k less fish and close at the same time. How is that a win in any way?

Lorne
 
Been around the fish politics game for a long time, and involved with litigation for almost as long. After a while and a few lessons in the courtroom you start to see the benefit of knowing your risks and planning for the fall out if things don't go as you hope. The risk of losing a case like this is something we need to consider carefully - no need for me to repeat the consequences I spelled out earlier. We can get all fired up in the belly about having our day in court only to get shot down in flames and be stuck with the consequences of a bad court decision.

Remember who you are up against too. You will face DFO who have lots of cash and lawyers, the Commercial sector will jump in and Third Party themselves to the action - another well funded group of lawyers...and there we will be with limited funds cobbled together and only being able to pay for the bare minimum of trial prep. Not exactly a recipe for success.

I've learned by my many errors that it is time well spent early in the game planning out your strategy and understanding your options. We have lots of options before going down the litigation trail. When and if we do decide this is the best option, we need to have a very large war chest before we push off from the dock, otherwise its like bringing a knife to a gun fight.

I would also say this, the current situation isn't exactly a lost cause for us either.
 
Well I'am not a charter operator but if I was and if my business had been and was being adversely affected by these early halibut closures I would definitly look into being the plaintiff in a class action lawsuit.....despite all the fear mongering and misinformation posted here by some members it is quite clear after a careful reading of the information on their web site below that there is absolutely no risk in at least exploring the possibilities.....

http://www.myclassaction.ca/learn/#.T0Bw804geke

http://www.myclassaction.ca/faq/#.T0BxDk4gekc
 
Millertime, you missed my point altogether. All you have there is the information regarding how a class action law suit works in very simple terms. It is easy to start litigation, it is costly and risky to continue it. AND, the biggest risk is an adverse judgment. It is misinformation to state there are no risks with litigation. Go ahead and give her a try. I can only hope for all of us you are successful and that we do not end up with an adverse judgment. One only has to look as far as the recent judgment surrounding JDF orcas to get my misinformation.
 
wow, what a damming article. the political manipulations on your side of the border are every bit as bad as they are down this way. reason seems to have been abandonned in favor of rule by corporation. this house of cards will collapse and unfortunately you and me will recieve that fall out.
 
We did the boat-baracade/parade **** a couple of years ago; basically encircled the Legislature. Didn't accomplish dick!
In my view, the action wasn't taken far enough. They quickly responded by sending in an army of traffic cops to keep us moving; successfully rendering our rolling-flotilla not much more than a minor traffic jam. Yeah, we got the Govner a 30 second blurb on the 6' o'clock news but that was it. Over, done.

If the rolling flotilla thing ever comes to fruition again, (IMHO) we need enough participants guarenteed to completely encircle the Legislature - parked end to end with no room for a tow-truck to get in at us - then shut the joint down for a day or so.

Course Harper would have us labled 'enemies of Canada' and send in a swat-team...
 
We did the boat-baracade/parade **** a couple of years ago; basically encircled the Legislature. Didn't accomplish dick!
In my view, the action wasn't taken far enough. They quickly responded by sending in an army of traffic cops to keep us moving; successfully rendering our rolling-flotilla not much more than a minor traffic jam. Yeah, we got the Govner a 30 second blurb on the 6' o'clock news but that was it. Over, done.

If the rolling flotilla thing ever comes to fruition again, (IMHO) we need enough participants guarenteed to completely encircle the Legislature - parked end to end with no room for a tow-truck to get in at us - then shut the joint down for a day or so.

Course Harper would have us labled 'enemies of Canada' and send in a swat-team...
little hawk, I know one problem I saw with last time was the medias message and the public perception. Even though CB's message was clear and to the point, it seemed public and media spun it to thinking we were just greedy fisherman wanting to take more of a 'depleted' resource. The message really needs clarity that its about a 'few' privileged owning a majority of the resource and the sport fishery just wanting a larger portion of the approved catch. Why should 436 be given so much when most don't even fish it themselves? Hammer that home and of course the problem that the government lied when they said fishing would be open set dates every year! We would have to keep in mind that government just gave us 3%, so to come back wanting more will look like more greed from the outside even though we know that isn't the case!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You can keep writing all the letters you want. Keep having those “town meetings.” Keep believing, thinking, and saying whatever. Keep playing those DFO games; which btw, they are masters. Or, just realize the only way these issues will get resolved is by going through Court. Sorry, but anything and everything like this, the only way it ever gets resolved in Canada (or the U.S.) is by going through the courts.

Totally agree with you Charlie.....just wish more people realized it.....
 
Totally agree with you Charlie.....just wish more people realized it.....

If the letter writing, town meetings, and all the other grassroots political maneuvering don't work at all, then why did the gov't give even 3%? If they believed their position was sound, with a fair allocation and with commercial license holders holding a saleable asset, then why wouldn't they just stand pat, like they have for last 10 years, and say "we're doing nothing wrong, why would we change"? Instead, they made an arbitrary decision to take 3% of the quota away from the commercial license holders, and I've heard of no compensation to them for taking away a chunk of their supposedly bought and paid for quotas.

I see this as a precedent. For one, they moved quota from com to rec, based on nothing other than political pressure. There's two lobby groups asking for more .... they threw the rec sector a bone, or I prefer to think of it, they put a teeny tiny little wedge in the door...and once that door is opened once, it is difficult to close. You have admitted 12% isn't fair and that it isn't set in stone. Why 15%? Why not 20%? 30%? 50%? Once the number is admitted to be wrong, then the discussion starts on a RATIONALE for what the number should be. That is far ahead of the standing pat stonewall faced in prior years. Seems we've maybe moved from fruitless protest into a negotiation phase.

Second, if indeed there was no payment ... say next year or 5 years from now, they move another 5% to rec sector, or 10% or 50% or shut down commercial quotas altogether, a logical extension of this implies that no compensation is required. If the commercial sector owns it, then taking away 3% this year should require compensation ... but if no compensation is owed for 3%, then there is no logical difference from taking away 30% or any other number. Thinking about it, maybe it will be the commercial sector that ends up taking this point to Court ... and if so, then the rec sector might well join the Crown in defending their actions, emphasizing this quota in itself has no value -- perhaps a much less costly legal maneuver!
 
Back
Top