COURT FILE NO.: CV-08-334 DATE: 2009/03/20 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: ‘The Corporation of the City of Brantford v. Ruby Montour, Floyd Montour, Clive Garlow, Charlie Green, Mary Green, David Martin, Hazel Hill, Aaron Detlor, the Haudenosaunee Development Institute, Jane Doe, John Doe and Persons Unknown. BEFORE: The Honourable Mr. Justice H. 8. Arrell COUNSEL: N. Smitheman and T. Pratt for the Plaintiff F, Faraday, for Ruby and Floyd Montour W. MeDowell and M. Jillison, Amicus curiae, for self-represented defendants K. Hensel, for Hazel Hill J. Orkin, for Aaron Detlor L. Strezos, for the Haudenosaunee Development Institute D. Feliciant and Mr. Brown QC. for the Province of Ontario ENDORSEMENT [1] The plaintifi’s motion for an interlocutory injunction is adjourned pending the hearing of the defendants’ applications to quash the plaintiff's by-laws which will commence on May 19, 2009 at 10:00 a.m.[2] The following interim orders will issue: [3] This court orders that the defendants cease and desist from blocking, interfering or in anyway obstructing in any manner the movement of people, vehicles or equipment into or out of the 10 designated sites as attached as Schedule A to this order. [4] This court further orders that Ontario, no later than Friday, April 3, 2009, initiate, arrange and commence meaningful consultation, negotiation, accommodation and reconciliation among the competing rights and interests of the City of Brantford, the Haudenosaunee people and itself. Such good faith and meaningful consultation on behalf of all parties, will specifically include the 10 sites as per paragraph 3 but may also include other areas within the City, if the parties agree. [5] The Haudenosaunee people will form a committee by March 27, 2009 of 10 people or less to represent them at these consultations. [6] This court further orders that the parties will attend before this court on May 19, 2009 at 10:00 a.m, and advise as to their progress pursuant to paragraph 4 of this order. The amount of information the court receives will be decided at that time after hearing submissions from all parties. [7] This court further orders that on 48 hours notice, with service on the party’s solicitors, any party may seek further direction from this court.3. {8] This court further orders that enforcement of the two by-laws which are the subject matter of this litigation, will not be enforced by the plaintiff, until further order of this court. ARRELL, J. DATE: March 20, 2009DATE: March 20, 2009 COURT FILE NO.: CV-08-334 DATE: 2009/02/20 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: The Corporation of the City of Brantford v. Montour et al BEFORE: — The Hon. Mr. Justice H. S. Arrell COUNSEL: N. Smitheman and T. Pratt, for the Plaintiff F. Faraday, for Ruby and Floyd Montour W. McDowell and M. Jillison, Amicus curiae, for self-represented defendants; K. Hensel, for Hazel Hill; J. Orkin, for Aaron Detlor; L. Strezos, for the Haudenosaunee Development Institute D. Feliciant for the Province of Ontario ENDORSEMENT ARRELL, J.