Local Couit Case Sets Precedence

In Water Use

The case of Clay Stead-
man/plaintiff verses Erickson
Gold Mining Corp. (defendant),
heard in the Supreme Court of
British Columbia and later in the
Court of Appeals will in all
likelihood become a text book
classic. It proves even in this
day and age that an individual's
right can not be oveéer-iooked in
favor of the large corporation.

In his action Mr. Steadman
claimed damages on an injunction
against the defendant for alleged
nuisance and trespass arising
from- road work done on their
property, in August of 1985, and
unsuccessful corrective action
taken in September of that same

year. igus
Steadman claimed

work undertaken on property
bordering his own, caused silt
and mud to flow onto his land and
contaminating his water supply,
thus making his property uninhab~-
itable and greatly diminishing
it's value.
The defendant, Erickson Gold
based their case on the
Steadman had no
water license, he therefore did
not have any right to action.

That the crown owns all water and
regulates it's use only the
Attorney General should take any
action.

In his reasons’ for
ment, the Honorable Judge
states that; the activities
ried on-by the detendant and the
remedial measures taken did con-
stitute a nuisance and an action-
able wrong in common law. He
further went on to say that he
couid see the Water

that road

Corp.
fact that since

judge-
Perry
Car

nothing in

Act that intended to ‘deprive a
person the right to use unrecord-
ed water and that no person hada
right to pollute or contaminate
such water.

In the Court of Appeal, the
Honourable Justice Seaton, in
upholding the decision referred
to a previously written statement
that stated,"That the right to
foul water is not the same as the
right to use it. That no man has
the right to use his land in such

a way as to be a nuisance to. his
neighbor."

“Comparison to the use. ot
water as to light or the air we
breathe would indicate that  in-
Gividuals have the use ot these
commodities in their natural

state and that any contamination
could constitute an actionable
nuisance." In this case indivi-
dual's right to the use of un
recorded water for domeatic pur-
poses was upheld.

In his closing statement,
Judge Seaton states: "The enjoy-
ment on the water for domestic

purposes is contemplated by the
Water Act and is not inconsistant
with the purpose of the Act. All
that the plaintiff asserts is a
right to use and enjoy that
water, until the Crown issues a
license in respect to it. Until
that has happened the plaintiff
is entitled to claim that defen-
dant must not make the water
unuseable."

As well as general damages
and court costs, Mr. Steadman
will receive compensation yet to
be agreed upon between the

parties concerned.

Steel Workers

‘Sponsor Course

|

Pictured above are
pants and instructors
Zorniak (Edmonton) and Mel
Downing (Kimberley) in the rec-
ently sponsored Health and Safety
course. Karen Muir, Keith
Taylor, Dave Chapple and Valdemar
Isidora from local 6536 as well
aS Helen Joseph, Tim Williams and
Dave Kenny, Local 8449 were
actively involved.

The course was held as... part
ot an effort to help the Satety
Committe in its-transition to an
underground environment. Sub-
jects covered inc¢luded ventila
tion, mine gasses, mobile equip-
ment W.C.B., dust Supression,
working sately with asbestos and
Wet M lin ors ‘

partici-
Robert

i.