Taseko seeks to sue Ottawa for malfeasance

Taseko Mines Ltd. claims the federal government acted unlawfully in pushing its British Columbia copper project off the rails. Its solution: Try to sue the government for damages and to find out precisely what happened.

On Wednesday, Taseko will appear in a federal court in Vancouver to argue that its two judicial review applications to Ottawa should be combined into one civil lawsuit seeking damages. The move, which appears to be unprecedented, is being fiercely opposed by the government.

“We haven’t found another instance where a company in precisely this position sues the federal government,” said lawyer John Hunter of Hunter Litigation Chambers, which is representing Taseko.

Taseko claims it was the only logical course of action. The Vancouver-based miner says it has evidence of actual malfeasance by federal officials, including secret meetings with opponents of the $1.5-billion New Prosperity project that could have swung Ottawa’s decision.

The project has been controversial for many years. Taseko’s first Prosperity mine proposal was approved by the British Columbia government in 2010, but rejected by Ottawa later that year. It cited environmental concerns over Taseko’s plan to drain the nearby Fish Lake.

Taseko came up with a new mine plan that would save Fish Lake at a cost of about $300-million.

But in February of this year, the federal government rejected that proposal as well. Prime Minister Stephen Harper himself said an environmental review of the project was “damning.”

According to the company, the only reason Ottawa found evidence of environmental damage is that Natural Resources Canada made a key error: It studied the wrong tailings dam design, and thus assumed there would be seepage.

Taseko challenged the decision through a judicial review application. Shortly afterward, the company launched a second judicial challenge as it learned of a series of meetings between government officials and Tsilhqot’in National Government, a First Nations group fiercely opposed to the mine. The meetings, which were not disclosed by Ottawa, were documented on the Facebook page of Chief Roger William. Taseko was livid, as it was given no opportunity to respond to whatever was discussed.

“Canada has also refused to respond to Taseko’s request for submissions, maps, meeting notes, handwritten notes, minutes, memorandums, emails and calendar entries related to [those] meetings,” the company said in a court submission.

Additionally, Taseko requested documents from Ottawa related to the New Prosperity rejection that it said were either not granted or blacked out.

If Taseko’s request for a civil suit is granted, the miner would have a greater ability to force disclosure of those documents and others from Ottawa, in addition to the potential damages.

Taseko has not specified the appropriate amount of damages. But the company noted it has already spent $142-million on New Prosperity and the project has a net present value of roughly $2-billion.

Even if the request for a civil suit is rejected, Taseko’s two judicial proceedings related to New Prosperity will continue. A decision on a civil suit is not expected immediately.

Taseko still hopes it can reach a settlement with Ottawa and get to work building the mine.

“We’re miners, not litigators,” said Brian Battison, Taseko’s vice-president of corporate affairs. “We know mining and that’s what we seek to do. This litigation is not our first choice.”