Province to Pay Logging Company $1.75 Million
Tuesday, December 31, 2013 @ 10:49 AM
Fort Nelson, B.C.- The Province of BC has been ordered by BC Supreme Court Justice Anthony Saunders to pay $1.75 million to a logging company for losses suffered because the Province failed to advise the company that a blockade was planned by a First Nations group.
The case dates back to 2006, when Moulton Contracting was prevented from accessing two sites for which it had been granted licenses to log.
The Behn family of the Fort Nelson First Nation had warned the Province months in advance of the blockade, of its plans to prevent any access to the sites which are on its traditional territory.
The $1.75 million award is the estimate of the revenue lost by Moulton Contracting during the 2006-2007 logging season.
Comments
Headline should read “Taxpayers to Pay Logging Company $1.7 Million” because of our Politicians incompetence.
Since when are companies paid for lost revenue? Lost profits perhaps, but I doubt they would have made 1.75 million profit on the deal
I wonder who blundered on this one couldn’t have been the libs. noway they aren’t that stupid,or are they?????
I can see Enbridge lining up with it’s hands out already!
How about the early Asian immigrants paying up.
We must not be getting the whole story. Blockade threats are part of doing business in the forestry industry. Did Moulton Contracting talk to first nations in the area? Doesn’t sound like it.
“Did Moulton Contracting talk to first nations in the area? Doesn’t sound like it.”
Huh?…..If Moulton was awarded the cash they probably did what was required but got screwed over by whoever had to payout the cash. Most likely the cash was awarded because of incompetence, lack of due diligence, or plain ignorance of the requirements for the situation by the payer.
Whole story or not whether Moulton talked to the Pope, the Incredible Hulk, or Santa Clause the cash indicates whoever you think they should or shouldn’t have talked to is irrelevant, JB.
It is the owners or licensee’s responsibility to ensure access to the land, not a contractor’s.
However, the best thing is to read the case decision and one would find out all the facts.
$1.7million is not likely the cost of doing the work. It is a reasonable figure for the net revenue rather than the gross revenue. These types of contracts are not puny things.
I assume that the “Province” is actually BC Timber Supply.
The precursor to this decision was a decision in the Supreme Court of Canada date May, 2013 in which the Behns took Moulton to court.
http://www.mccarthy.ca/article_detail.aspx?id=6306
Going back to costs incurred by Moulton after reading the SCC decision, they had expenses of mobilizing equipment, setting up a camp, etc. which were not repaid since they did no work. The timber harvested was to be supplied to a mill. So, they had expenses as well as loss of expected revenues.
dirtcheap I think you have got this one right.Maybe the politicians were at a photo op and did not have time to deal with this.No pressure when it’s taxpayers money.
Sorry BCTS = BC Timber Sales
Here is a bit more detail on the case
http://www.theprovince.com/news/government+ordered+logging+company+over+aboriginal+blockade/9335302/story.html
From the above link, for those who do not click though on links.
“BCTS (B.C. Timber Sales) kept the plaintiff in the dark, and did so at a critical point in time,” Judge Anthony Saunders wrote in a decision posted to the court’s website last week.
“I find that the province was obliged, as a matter of contract, to advise Moulton Contracting of Mr. Behn’s threat, in a timely manner, and that it failed to do so. … I further find that, had Moulton Contracting been advised of Mr. Behn’s threat, it would not have pursued logging under the TSLs (timber sales licences).”
Saunders also concluded the province failed to meaningfully consult with the Fort Nelson First Nation about the proposed logging activity, particularly since the band was not equipped to properly assess such projects and their potential impact.
On that issue, the judge wrote: “I cannot find that the province consulted with (Fort Nelson First Nation) in a manner sufficient to maintain the honour of the Crown.”
Saunders said the Behn family wasn’t liable because the blockade wasn’t technically illegal. Since the blockade occurred an unregulated roadway on Crown land, the blockade didn’t amount to the criminal definition of mischief, the judge said.
======================================
The early days of BCTS …… in my opinion the image they presented to the people of this province was not the best.
I do not know whether it was out of ignorance or that they felt as a crown corporation they did not need to answer to the people of this province.
The BC Supreme Court Decision December 23, 2013. (trial in 2011)
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/13/23/2013BCSC2348.htm
Can you say… ‘appeal’?
Comments for this article are closed.