Minnova Corp. V. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 FC 898

In this case, the Federal Court decided that an application for judicial review was premature, but nevertheless agreed with the applicant that the impugned decision was unreasonable.

In 2014, Minnova Corp. decided to re-open the Puffy Lake Mine in northern Manitoba, a gold mine that was operated between 1987 and 1989 under a licence issued under the Manitoba Environment Act.

Minnova became the licencee under that licence in 2012. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency determined that the reopening of the mine would constitute a "new" mine, and that as a result a project description was required by s. 16(c) of the Schedule to the Regulations in order to decide whether the project required an environmental assessment. Minnova sought judicial review of the Agency's decision, acknowledging that it wanted to avoid the environmental assessment process.

The Court held that the real issue was whether an environmental assessment is required, not whether Minnova was required to submit a project description. The decision requiring a project description was not final and accordingly was not fit for judicial review. Although obiter, the Court then went on to consider the propriety of the agency's decision, and agreed with Minnova that the project should be considered an "existing mine," not a "new mine," based on a purposive construction of those phrases.