Perhaps as a reflection of the current constitutional crisis, a large proportion of the reported maritime law decisions in Canada in 1989–1990 dealt with the jurisdiction of the Federal Court of Canada. This is a return to the old Canadian pastime, practised in the long, cold winter months, of attending in warm court rooms and arguing about whether a legal question is a Federal or Provincial matter under the constitution. The remainder of the decisions are fortunately in reference to a broad cross-section of maritime law.

1. Ontario v. Pembina Exploration 1

A fishing company whose net became entangled with an unmarked gas well in Lake Erie brought a claim for damages in the Ontario Small Claims Court. The question was whether an Admiralty claim was within the purview of the Small Claims Court. The Supreme Court of Canada held that under s. 92(14) of the Constitution Act 1867 (Canada’s basic constitutional document), a Provincial legislature did have the power to grant an inferior court such jurisdiction. This decision was consistent with Canada’s essentially unitary court system, in which Provincial Courts, inferior and superior, apply both Provincial and Federal law. Provincial power (over the administration of justice in the Province and the establishment of Provincial Courts) under the Constitution Act 1867, s. 92(14) was subject to two possible exceptions, neither of which was applicable here. Section 101 did not pose a problem, as the Federal Government had not expressly placed Admiralty matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of a Federally-created court. Nor could s. 96 be applied against the Small Claims Court’s jurisdiction, as, at the time of Confederation in 1867, Vice-Admiralty Courts had been considered distinct from superior ones. Consequently, the Small Claims Court could hear an Admiralty matter.