Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

July 18, 1997  1325 - 1407                                                                  le 18 juillet 1997

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Edmund R. Saunders et al.

v. (26066)

Oceanus Marine Inc. (N.S.)

G.F. Philip Romney

FILING DATE 14.5.1997

Gordon Denis Gillespie

R. Ian Histed

Savino & Co. Legal Services

v. (26061)

Her Majesty The Queen (Man.)

Shawn Greenberg

Manitoba Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 19.6.1997

Henry Bullock et al.

Michael S. O’Neill

Sarlo O’Neill

v. (26074)

Key Property Management Inc. et al. (Ont.)

Kevin R. Aalto

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

FILING DATE 9.6.1997

Wayne B. Carter

Jacques F. Cormier

Leger, Cormier & Assoc.

v. (25921)

Patricia J. Boardman (née McCue) et al. (N.B.)

W. Hugh Murphy

Murphy, Murphy & Mollins

FILING DATE 27.6.1997

Suzie Lebel et al.

Nathalie Cherrier

Janson, Larente & Cherrier

c. (25958)

Banque nationale du Canada et al. (Qué.)

Luc Fleurant

LeBel et Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 13.6.1997

Edward John Sawicki

J. Paul Fletcher

Harris Fletcher Telsuk Associates

v. (26031)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

Trevor Shaw

Crown Law Office

FILING DATE 4.7.1997

Ronald Richard Corbin

Ronald Richard Corbin

v. (26054)

The City of Winnipeg et al. (Man.)

Glenn Joynt

Legal Services

FILING DATE 24.6.1997

Leonard James Scobie

Paul Burstein

Burstein and Paine

v. (26055)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 11.7.1997

Jeffrey Hugh Williams

George Thomson

Dept. of Justice

v. (26059)

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (F.C.A.)

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 10.6.1997

James Mercier

Robert C. Burgener

v. (26060)

The Minister of Justice et al. (Alta.)

Margaret Unsworth

Alberta Justice Constitutional Law

FILING DATE 20.6.1997

Miroslav Zborovsky

Mary-Jo Maur Raycroft

Raycroft Law Office

v. (26062)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

J.W. Leising

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 19.6.1997

J.-Andre Emond

Lawrence Corriveau, c.r.

Corriveau & Associés

c. (26067)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

Germain Martin

Subs. du procureur général

DATE DE PRODUCTION 26.6.1997

Albert de Niverville

Albert de Niverville

c. (26075)

Le ministre du Revenu national (C.A.F.)(Qué.)

Martin Gentile

Min. de la Justice

DATE DE PRODUCTION 10.6.1997

W. Lee Huck

W. Lee Huck

v. (26076)

Komol Plastics Co. Ltd. (B.C.)

Lori R. Monk

Kerfoot, Cameron & Co.

FILING DATE 9.6.1997

Tod Mountain Development Ltd.

Scott Dunlop

Davis & Co.

v. (26077)

Bruce Deildal (B.C.)

Robert W. McDiarmid

Morelli, Chertkow, Griffiths & Hogg

FILING DATE 9.6.1997

Vincent Godoy

Christopher Hicks

Hicks Block Adams Derstine

v. (26078)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

Scott Hutchison

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 5.6.1997

Claudette Bastings-Allard et al.

Claudette Dagenais

Dagenais & Assoc.

c. (26079)

Andrea Bastings et al. (Qué.)

Gilles A. Daoust

DATE DE PRODUCTION 6.6.1997

The Alberta Pharmaceutical Association et al.

William W. Shores

Shores Belzil

v. (26080)

Beverly Finlay et al. (Alta.)

G. Brent Gawne

Gawne & Assoc.

FILING DATE 10.6.1997

Royal Bank of Canada

F.R. Foran, Q.C.

Howard, Mackie

v. (26081)

W. Got & Associates Electric Ltd. et al. (Alta.)

J.A. Weir, Q.C.

Weir Bowen

FILING DATE 9.6.1997

Ville de Verdun

Stéphane Brière

Hébert Denault

c. (26082)

Allstate du Canada compagnie d’assurance (Qué.)

Michel Caron

Lavery de Billy

DATE DE PRODUCTION 16.6.1997

Sail Labrador Ltd.

Elizabeth M. Heneghan

Elizabeth M. Heneghan Law Office

v. (26083)

The Owners, Navimar Corporation Ltée and all others interested in the ship “Challenge One”, her equipment, bunkers and freights et al. (F.C.A.)

Alain R. Pilotte

Alain R. Pilotte Law Office

FILING DATE 13.6.1997

Ford Motor Co. of Canada, Ltd.

Joseph W. Mik

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

v. (26084)

The Minister of National Revenue (F.C.A.)

Michael Ciavaglia

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 18.6.1997

Les Forges du Lac Inc. et al.

Jacques Larochelle

c. (26085)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

Gilles Ouimet

Justice Canada

DATE DE PRODUCTION 12.6.1997

Nuno Dasilva

Thomas G. Heintzman

McCarthy Tétrault

v. (26086)

The Corporation of the City of Toronto (Ont.)

Andrew A. Weretelnyk

Corp. of the City of Toronto

FILING DATE 16.6.1997

Lynanne Beck

Drew R. Filyk

Merchant Law Group

v. (26087)

Paul Wayne Beck (Sask.)

Kloppenburg & Kloppenburg

FILING DATE 16.6.1997

Harry Edward MacDonald

Philip B. Cornish

v. (26088)

The Corporation of the Village of Bayfield (Ont.)

M. Mitchell

Mountain, Mitchell, Hill, Monteith & Ritsma

FILING DATE 18.6.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

Gregg Lawlor

Manitoba Justice

v. (26089)

Wallace Marvin Scott (Man.)

G. Greg Brodsky, Q.C.

Walsh, Micay & Co.

FILING DATE 23.6.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

Kathryn E. Neilson, Q.C.

v. (26091)

Ian Cocker (B.C.)

DennisT.R. Murray, Q.C.

FILING DATE 19.6.1997

Susan Weiss

Susan Weiss

v. (26092)

The Attorney General of Canada (F.C.A.)

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 20.6.1997

Domenico Manno

Jack Waissman

Laurin Frigon Waissman Cliche et Assoc.

c. (26093)

United States of America et al. (Qué.)

James L. Brunton

A.G. of Canada

DATE DE PRODUCTION 23.6.1997

Rena Ann Quinn

David A. Zuber

Ferguson & Boeckle

v. (26094)

Canadian Airlines International Ltd. (Ont.)

John Rosolak

Weir & Foulds

FILING DATE 27.6.1997

Brian McMillan

Harvey I. Pollock, Q.C.

Pollock & Co.

v. (26095)

The Rural Municipality of Thompson et al. (Man.)

R.D. McDonald

Fillmore & Riley

FILING DATE 17.6.1997

Dr. Feliz Ravikovich

Felix Ravikovich

v. (26096)

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (Ont.)

Robert P. Armstrong

Tory, Tory, Deslauriers & Binnington

FILING DATE 20.6.1997

Lorne Maddeaux

Christopher Hicks

Hicks Block Adams Derstine

v. (26097)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

Scott Hutchison

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 27.6.1997

Alta Surety Co.

Geoffrey A. Saunders

Flinn Merrick

v. (26098)

Campbell Comeau Engineering Ltd. (N.S.)

Alan V. Parish, Q.C.

Green Parish

FILING DATE 20.6.1997

Buddy Lee

Dugald E. Christie

Christie and Company

v. (26099)

The Canadian Human Rights Commission et al. (F.C.A.)

Patrick Gilligan-Hackett

Alexander, Holburn, Beaudin & Lang

FILING DATE 24.6.1997

Brian Arp

Gil D. McKinnon, Q.C.

v. (26100)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Oleh Kuzma

Crown Counsel

FILING DATE 25.6.1997

The Corporation of the Town of Wasaga Beach et al.

Shea N. Bunston

v. (26102)

Murray M. Sinclair et al. (Ont.)

Geoffrey D. E. Adair

Enfield, Hemmerick, Adair & Wood

FILING DATE 24.6.1997

The Maritime Life Assurance Co.

J. David B. Eaton

Chalker, Green & Rowe

v. (26103)

Harold Schwartz (Nfld.)

Joseph S. Hutchings

Poole, Althouse, Clarke, Thompson & Thomas

FILING DATE 27.6.1997

Marianne Lisenko et al.

Marianne Lisenko

c. (26104)

Commission scolaire St-Hyacinthe Valmonts et al. (Qué.)

Brodeur & Boileau Assoc.

DATE DE PRODUCTION 3.7.1997

Donald C. Loiselle

Donald C. Loiselle

c. (26105)

Sa Majesté La Reine et al. (C.A.F.)

Guy A. Blouin

Min. de la Justice

DATE DE PRODUCTION 2.7.1997

Josephakis Charalambous

Richard C.C. Peck, Q.C.

Peck Tammen

v. (26106)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

William F. Ehrcke

Min. of the A.G.

FILING DATE 9.7.1997

Wai Keung Tsui

Wai Keung Tsui

v. (26107)

Boardwalk Regency Corp. (Ont.)

Lise G. Favreau

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

FILING DATE 18.6.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

Gregg Lawlor

Manitoba Justice

v. (26108)

Dean James Bauder (Man.)

Amanda Sansregret

Smith, Sansregret

FILING DATE 9.6.1997

Gilbert Brass

Marshall Hopkins

Pringle, Renouf, MacDonald & Assoc.

v. (26109)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

Paul Moreau

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 2.7.1997

Azam Mian

Azam Mian

v. (26110)

Canadian Human Rights Commission et al. (F.C.A.)

Joseph de Pencier

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 7.7.1997

Bird Construction Co. Ltd.

V. Ross Morrison

Silver, Brown, Sosnovitch

v. (26111)

Sault Ste. Marie Public Utilities Commission (Ont.)

Ronald J. Rolls

Fasken, Campbell, Godfrey

FILING DATE 8.7.1997

Marty Lorraine Morrisey

Malcolm S. Jeffock

Nova Scotia Legal Aid

v. (26112)

Her Majesty The Queen et al. (N.S.)

FILING DATE 9.7.1997

John Dykun

John Dykun

v. (26113)

James H. Odishaw (Alta.)

J.P. Brumlik

Brumlik Lees

FILING DATE 9.7.1997

Janine Larose

Janine Larose

c. (26114)

La Ville de Mascouche (Qué.)

Richard Provencher

DATE DE PRODUCTION 10.6.1997

JUNE 27, 1997 / LE 27 JUIN 1997

                                 CORAM:  Chief Justice Lamer and Cory and McLachlin JJ. /

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                Sa Majesté la Reine

                                                                        c. (25967)

                                                                               Yannick Gagné (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve -La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en décidant que la découverte de l’arme était une preuve dérivée inadmissible? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en décidant que la déclaration de l’intimé faite à sa mère était entachée du simple fait qu’une déclaration antérieure faite à la police était inadmissible? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en décidant qu’il fallait une mise en garde au jury concernant le témoin Marc Lebeau et que les directives du juge de première instance ne constituaient pas une mise en garde suffisante concernant ce témoin?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                             Eusèbe Gauvin, Raymond Leblanc, François Gauvin, Pierre Duguay

                                                                                                v. (25994)

                                                                        Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(N.B.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Sentencing - Whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to follow the principle of parity by imposing sentences for the appellants which were longer than the sentences imposed on the accused who had greater involvement in the conspiracy.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                           Robert Thérien

                                                                                                c. (25848)

                                                                                         Marcelle Pellerin

et

Pierre F. Côté, Rosaire Sénécal et le Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Législation - Interprétation - Libertés publiques - Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Preuve - Élection - Élection provinciale - Contestation d’élection - Manoeuvre électorale frauduleuse - Domicile - Commission de révision électorale - Chose jugée - Droit de vote - Droit d’être candidat à une élection - Composition du tribunal - Juge à la retraite - En l’absence de fraude de la part du demandeur, la Cour du Québec, saisie d’une requête en contestation d’élection, était-elle en droit de réviser l’opportunité des décisions rendues par la Commission de révision? - L’infraction de manoeuvre électorale frauduleuse prévue à la Loi électorale, L.R.Q. c. E-3.3, requiert-elle la preuve d’intention frauduleuse et/ou de mens rea? -  Peut-on, par l’application des règles de preuve prévues en matière civile, priver un individu de ses droits constitutionnels? - L’audition de la Requête en contestation d’élection amendée a-t-elle été entendue par un banc valablement formé?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM: Chief Justice Lamer and L’Heureux-Dubé and Gonthier JJ. /

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges L’Heureux-Dubé et Gonthier

                                                                                         Lucien Brouillette

                                                                                                c. (25791)

                                                          Société d’agriculture du Comté de Verchères (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - Omission du demandeur de signifier et produire son mémoire d’appel dans le délai prévu - Appel réputé déserté aux termes de l’art. 503.1 du Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q. (1977), ch. C-25- Requête en prorogation de délai et annulation d’un certificat d’appel déserté rejetée par la Cour d’appel - L’art. 523 du Code de procédure civile peut-il être interprété comme privant la Cour d’appel du pouvoir de rendre une ordonnance d’injonction interlocutoire durant l’appel? - Les critères prévus par la jurisprudence et l’art. 523 du Code de procédure civile ont-ils été respectés par la Cour d’appel? - Le principe fondamental selon lequel une partie ne doit pas être privée de son appel si elle a un motif sérieux à faire valoir a-t-il été respecté par la Cour d’appel? - Construction Gilles Paquette Ltée c. Entreprises Végo Ltée, C.S.C., no 25090; Société canadienne des postes c. Syndicat des postiers du Canada, C.S.C., no 25093.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM: La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Gonthier et Major

                                                                                        Donald Noel Albert

                                                                                                v. (25736)

                                                                        Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Whether the trial judge erred in law in failing to dismiss a juror  - Whether the trial judge erred in failing to instruct the jury on the criminal record of a witness - Whether the trial judge erred in failing to instruct the jury on similar fact evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

June 3, 1994

British Columbia Supreme Court (Skipp J.)

Conviction: one count of robbery and one count of using a firearm in the commission of an indictable offence

November 6, 1996

British Columbia Court of Appeal

(McEachern, Esson, Prowse JJ.A.)

Appeal from conviction dismissed

April 3, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

(Iacobucci J.)

Motion for an extension of time to file application for leave to appeal to May 12, 1997 granted; motion to appoint counsel dismissed

May 15, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed and other ancillary motions

FBI Foods Ltd. -- Les aliments FBI Ltée., FBI Brands Ltd. -- Les marques FBI Ltée.,

 and Lawrence Kurlender

                                                                                                v. (25778)

               Cadbury Schweppes Inc. And Cadbury Beverages Canada Inc./Breuvages Cadbury Canada Inc. (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial  law -   Remedies - Appeal - Restitution - Breach of confidence - Injunction - Trade mark holder divulging most of secret recipe for beverage to manufacturing and distributing company pursuant to licencing agreement - Trade mark holder’s successor  terminating licencing contract with company - Company using confidential recipe to develop competing product - Successor’s delay in enforcing their equitable rights - Applicants purchasing assets and recipe from company - Trial judge awarding damages to Respondents based upon cost Applicant would have incurred to develop a competing product in a legitimate fashion during the “headstart period” - Court of Appeal granting damages for the “headstart period” based upon profits Respondents would have made  had they made the unauthorized sales and permanent injunction against further use of the confidential information - Whether court’s remedial flexibility attendant on a breach of confidence permit it to award equitable compensation for deterrent or punitive purposes so as to obviate the plaintiff’s need to prove loss - Whether Court of Appeal erred in limiting damages to the headstart period on the basis of the sales the Respondents might have made had they elected to act lawfully between 1983 and 1997 - Whether appeal court reviewing the trial court’s exercise of its remedial discretion in a breach of confidence claim can substitute its own view of the equities of the case, without identifying an error in principle on the part of the trial court.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                The Government of the Northwest Territories

                                                                                                v. (25924)

                     Public Service Alliance of Canada and Canadian Human Rights Commission (F.C.A.)(N.W.T.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Canadian Human Rights Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.H-6  - Judicial review - Reasonable apprehension of bias - Does section 63 of the Canadian Human Rights Act  authorise the Canadian Human Rights Commission to investigate a complaint made by territorial public service workers against the Government of the Northwest Territories - Was there a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of an investigator who prepared the investigation report on the basis of which the Canadian Human Rights Commission made its decision?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                             Marine Workers’ and Boilermakers’ Industrial Union, Local No.1

                                                                                                v. (25938)

                                                      British Columbia Maritime Employers Association (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Natural Justice - Canada Labour Board -  Canada Labour Board referred to a Commission’s Report in its reasons for dismissing an application for certification - Canada Labour Board did not notify parties it would rely on the report nor did it hear argument regarding the report - Whether Canada Labour Board denied natural justice or fairness.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 3, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

CORAM: L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Iacobucci JJ. /

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

                                                                                        Bert Thomas Stone

                                                                                                v. (25969)

                                                                        Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)

AND BETWEEN:

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (26032)

Bert Thomas Stone (Crim.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Defences - Automatism - Insane automatism - Non-insane automatism - Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to instruct the jury on non-insane automatism - Disclosure - Defence disclosure - Experts - Whether the trial judge erred in ordering the defence to produce the expert report prior to the Applicant giving evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there was no miscarriage of justice as a result of the trial judge ordering defence counsel to produce the expert report prior to the Applicant giving evidence - Sentencing - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that a sentencing judge might consider provocation as a mitigating factor on a sentence for manslaughter.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                              Narinder Lal

                                                                                                v. (25928)

                                                                  Dr. Sultan Alvi and Dr. Ramesh Jolly (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts ‑ Fiduciary obligations ‑ Breach ‑ Whether fiduciary obligation or constructive trust arose from informal arrangements to jointly invest in real estate speculation.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                        Boreal Property and Casualty Insurance Co., formerly Laurentian Casualty Co. of Canada

                                                                                                v. (25932)

                    Warneke Inc., carrying on business under the firm name and style of KWI Construction (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Whether a liability insurer who indemnifies its insured in respect of claims brought by third party claimants is entitled to share pro rata with its insured, the assets of the tort-feasor whose conduct caused the losses of the third party claimants as well as other uninsured losses to the insured - Whether the application of the rule expressed in Ledingham v. Ontario Hospital Services Commission, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 332 is restricted to situations where the losses of both the insured and the insurer arise out of a common subject matter.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Castlepoint Development Corporation and 853402 Ontario Limited

v. (25930)

James Barber McLeod and Wilberford Construction Inc.

   - and -

            Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Corporation (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law  - Land titles - Real property - Right of first refusal - Caution - Whether the courts erred in concluding that Wilberford’s right of first refusal became an option and therefore an equitable interest in the property the moment before McLeod and Castlepoint entered into the agreement of purchase and sale.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JULY 4, 1997 / LE 4 JUILLET 1997

CORAM: Chief Justice Lamer and Cory and McLachlin JJ. /

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                                        Paul Robert Burke,

                                                                                                v. (25980)

                                                                       Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Evidence - Did the Ontario Court of Appeal err in law in its conclusion that the trial judge had not erred in interfering with the Applicant’s cross-examination of an important Crown witness, thereby depriving the Applicant of the ability to make full answer and defence?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                The Board of Education for the City of Toronto

                                                                                                v. (25884)

                                                                   Ontario Human Rights Commission (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law ‑ Judicial review ‑ Statutes ‑ Interpretation ‑ Human Rights Code, 1981, S.O. 1981, c.53, ss.4(1), 8, 10 - Whether the Board of Education’s interviewers indirectly discriminated against an interviewee because of his place of origin and ethnic origin - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the decision of the board of inquiry did not constitute a finding of liability based on s.10 of the Code - Whether the fact that the Board of Education was expressly advised that s.10 formed no part of the case against it denied the Board of Education its right to procedural fairness.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                   John Susin, carrying on business as Aarvi Construction Co.

                                                                                                v. (25949)

                                                        John T. Morin and Campbell Godfrey and Lewtas (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Mechanics’ lien - Mechanics’ lien filed out of time - Respondent solicitor negligent in failing to set lien action down for trial within time period - Applicant suffering only nominal damages - Court of Appeal dismissing appeal - Whether lower courts erred.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                          Marie Alexander

                                                                                                v. (25950)

                                                                                         Emile Habib (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Contracts - Guaranty - Statutes - Statutory Interpretation - Statute of Frauds, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.19 - Whether three exhibits could be read together to prove a guarantee of a loan.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM: La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Gonthier et Major

                                                                                Attorney General of Canada

                                                                                                v. (26039)

                                                                   Karlheinz Schreiber (Crim.)(F.C.A.)(Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Search and seizure - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in holding that prior judicial approval based upon reasonable grounds on oath is required before Canadian officials can request a foreign state to search for and seize banking records kept and maintained within its territory.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

July 4, 1996

Federal Court (Trial Division) (Wetston J.)

Special case question answered in the affirmative

March 12, 1997

Federal Court of Appeal

(Stone J.A. [dissenting], Linden J.A., Henry D.J.)

Appeal dismissed

May 12, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                                                 Nutron Manufacturing Ltd.

                                                                                                v. (25942)

                                                                   Almecon Industries Limited (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Patents - Infringement - Interpretation of patent claims - Whether the scope of a patent monopoly was apparent from the claims - Whether the essence of an invention lay in the accomplishment of a result or a structure that was found in the claims - Reading-in limitations to the claims from the disclosure - Reading out limitations on the basis of later knowledge - Anticipation - Validity of British Celanese v. Courtaulds (1955), 52 R.P.C. 171.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

February 6, 1997

Federal Court of Appeal

(Strayer, Linden, McDonald JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

April 4, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                             Merck & Co., Inc. and Merck Frosst Canada Inc.

                                                                                                v. (25812)

                                      The Minister of National Health and Welfare and Apotex Inc. (F.C.A.)(Qué.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Patents - Statutory instruments - Interpretation - Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, ss.7(1)(e) and 7(5) - Jurisdiction - Did the Court of Appeal err in concluding that the jurisdiction to extend the legislative stay provided by Section 7(5) of the Regulations is exclusive of any other basis in fact and law - Is s.7(5) ultra vires for violating s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights - Is s.7(5) ultra vires as an interference with the Court’s institutional independence to control and supervise its own process?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM: L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Iacobucci JJ. /

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

                                                                                      Clifford Robert Olson

                                                                                                v. (26019)

                                                                Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(F.C.A.)(Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Freedom of association - Freedom of expression - Whether the Respondent’s agents deprived the Applicant of his rights under ss. 2(b)  and 2(d)  of the Charter  by preventing him from corresponding with the media.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                           Titus Nguiagain

                                                                                                c. (25796)

                                             Le Fonds pour la formation des chercheurs et l’aide à la recherche

- et -

La Commission de la fonction publique et Me Jean-Paul Roberge

ENTRE:

Titus Nguiagain

c.

Le Fonds pour la formation des chercheurs et l’aide à la recherche

- et -

Bureau du commissaire général du travail, Me Robert Levac et F.P.P.U.-C.E.Q. (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - Requête en rejet d’appel - Grief contestant le congédiement du demandeur rejeté - Requête en révision judiciaire à l’encontre de la sentence arbitrale rejetée par la Cour supérieure et appel à la Cour d’appel rejeté - Plaintes subséquentes du demandeur contestant son congédiement devant la Commission de la fonction publique du Québec et la Commission des normes du travail rejetées - Requête en révision judiciaire et requête en mandamus à l’encontre de ces décisions rejetées par la Cour supérieure et demandeur jugé plaideur vexatoire - Appel du demandeur - Requête en rejet d’appel accueillie par la Cour d’appel au motif que l’appel n’avait aucune chance de succès.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 24 septembre 1996

Cour supérieure du Québec

(Barakett j.c.s.)

Requête en mandamus à l’encontre de l’avis du commissaire général du travail et requête en révision judiciaire à l’encontre de la décision de la Commission de la fonction publique rejetées

Le 2 octobre 1996

Cour supérieure du Québec

(Barakett j.c.s.)

Demandeur déclaré plaideur vexatoire; requêtes en mandamus et révision judiciaire jugées frivoles, vexatoires et non fondées

Le 2 décembre 1996

Cour d’appel du Québec

(Rothman, Delisle et Robert jj.c.a.)

Requêtes en rejet d’appel accueillies et appel du demandeur rejeté

Le 3 février 1997

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée

Le 10 mars 1997

Cour suprême du Canada

Requête en prorogation de délai déposée

                                                                                    Russell Thomas Taylor

                                                                                                v. (25960)

                                                                               Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Assessment - Estoppel - Interest - Promissory estoppel or waiver - Whether Revenue Canada is entitled to resile from an agreement with a citizen and taxpayer, which the taxpayer in reliance thereon acted to his or her detriment - Should Revenue Canada be estopped from assessing penalties and interest, in breach of its agreement, on the basis of one or all the following:  (a) promissory estoppel;  (b) abuse of process (common law and/or section 7  of the Charter  (c) abuse of power;  (d) public policy; or (e) Revenue Canada’s own  formal policy.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JULY 11, 1997 / LE 11 JUILLET 1997

CORAM: Chief Justice Lamer and Cory and McLachlin JJ. /

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                    Euro-Can-Am Trading Inc., Morris Gladwin, Dale Gladwin and Grant Gladwin

                                                                                                v. (26057)

                                                                   Attorney General of Ontario (Crim.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Search and seizure - Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. 30 (4th Supplement ) as am. - Whether the failure to name a specific officer in the search warrant rendered the warrant invalid - Whether the failure to describe the offences other than by way of section numbers rendered the search warrant invalid - Does the Act provide a judge with the discretion to send seized materials to another country where they were obtained pursuant to an invalid warrant.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Privest Properties Ltd.,  Lord Realty Holdings Ltd., Polaris Realty (Canada) Limited, Lordina Limited, and Polaris Reality (Western) Limited 

v. (25952)

The Foundation Company of Canada Limited, Donalca Services Ltd., W.R. Grace & Co. of Canada Ltd., Eng & Wright Partners, Architects and W.R. Grace & Co. - Conn.

and

Lordina Limited

and

The Foundation Company of Canada Limited, Double A/D Distributors Ltd., Donalco Services Ltd., Mackenzie, Snowball, Skalbania & Associates Ltd., Webb, Zerefa, Menkes, Housden, Eng & Wright Partners, Architects, Nelson Skalbania, Donald Thomas, Charles Wright, Gerhard K. Schadow, Douglas Faulkner, Martin Bruckner, Workers’ Compensation Board, Gilbert Eng and W.R. Grace & Co. of Canada Ltd. (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Damages - Negligence - Property - Fireproofing material installed in building during renovations - Material contained asbestos - Material removed - Liability of general contractor, architect, supplier, manufacturer for costs of removal and replacement.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM: La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Gonthier et Major

                                                                             Stewart Genge and Rick Genge

                                                                                                v. (25948)

                                                                               Lionel Barrett Parrill (Nfld.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Motor vehicles - Negligence - Vicarious liability - Does the owner of a ski-doo regulated under the Motorized Snow Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles Act, R.S.N. 1990, c.  M-20 have vicarious liability under the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.N. 1990, c.  H-3 - Does the operator of a ski-doo keeping at the edge of the highway owe a duty of care to the operator of an overtaking motor car on an otherwise deserted highway.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Ann Frances MacKinnon, Gregory MacKinnon

Patricia MacNeil and Brian MacNeil

                                                                                                v. (25963)

Alan MacDonald, Kathleen MacDonald and

Daniel W.Almon (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Trial - Evidence - Boundary dispute - Bias - Whether the trial judge was biased -Whether circumstances exist which would cause the Applicants to have a reasonable apprehension of bias.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                               Air Canada

                                                                                                v. (25984)

McDonnell Douglas Corporations, Kleber-Colombes, S.A., Air Treads of Canada Limited,

  Robert G. Smith, Edward McKillip, Robert Barnes, Robin Smith, Leo Middles (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Injunction - Appeal - Jurisdiction - Statutes - Interpretation - Did the Court of Appeal err in upholding the Divisional Court’s decision dissolving an interlocutory injunction against the Respondent proceeding with numerous s. 17 applications to the Workers’ Compensation Act Tribunal in the absence of ruling on the Court’s inherent jurisdiction to issue an interlocutory injunction in personam enjoining a party litigant to prevent abuse of process? - Did the Court of Appeal err in apparently finding that the jurisdiction of the tribunal should oust the traditional jurisdiction of the Court? - Did the Court of Appeal err in holding that regardless of the hazard of there being two different decisions on the question, this cannot affect the right of the Respondent to commence proceedings under s. 17 of the Workers’ Compensation Act?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM: L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Iacobucci JJ. /

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

                                                                                     James Ralph MacInnis

                                                                                                v. (25877)

                                    Attorney General of Canada and National Parole Board (F.C.A.)(Crim.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Parole - Corrections and Conditional Release Act , S.C., 1992, c. 20  - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the procedural guarantees required in the conduct of hearings before the National Parole Board -Whether the Applicant was entitled to be represented by “counsel” at his parole hearing - Whether counsel should be permitted to cross-examine experts who filed reports at the parole hearing - Whether the National Parole Board has a duty to compel the appearance of experts whose reports are relied upon - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in holding that the effect of the decision of the Trial Division was to strike down the provisions of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                          Maryse Fournier

                                                                                                c. (25818)

                                                             Jacques Léger & Associés et Émile Colas (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - Requêtes visant à faire rejeter le pourvoi de la demanderesse en raison de son caractère abusif ou dilatoire accueillies par la Cour d’appel - Une justice expéditive de la Cour d’appel a-t-elle à empêcher la demanderesse d’élaborer au fond ses motifs d’appel? - Est-ce que les jugements de la Cour d’appel sont prématurés? - Est-ce qu’il était de l’intérêt de la Cour d’appel d’étudier en profondeur les motifs d’appel de la demanderesse? - Est-ce que l’appel de la demanderesse avait des chances de succès?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                            Nu-Pharm Inc.

                                                                                                v. (25956)

                                Janssen Pharmaceutica Inc., Janssen Pharmaceutica naamloze vennootschap and

                                                    The Minister of National Health and Welfare (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Oral contracts - Interpretation - Property law - Patents - Extinguishment of compulsory licence under Patent Act Amendment Act, 1992, S.C. 1993, c.2 - Did the Federal Court of Appeal err in construing an agreement in a manner contrary to the mutual understanding of the parties - Did the Federal Court of Appeal err in finding that, under an agency arrangement, ownership of patented medicine did not transfer to the Applicant prior to extinguishment of the compulsory licence - Does the purchaser of a licensed patented product acquire a good and valid title to the goods free of infringement if the licence is subsequently terminated?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM: La Forest, Cory and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Cory et Major

                                                       Offshore Leasing Incorporated

                                                                        v. (25318)

                                                   Adelaide Capital Corporation (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Courts - Whether guidelines should be established for lower courts when issues are remanded by the Supreme Court of Canada pursuant to s. 43(1.1)  or s. 46.1  of the Supreme Court Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.S-19  - What is the mandate and powers of lower courts when considering issues remanded to them?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JUNE 27, 1997 / LE 27 JUIN 1997

24752               MICHAEL FEENEY v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(B.C.)

CORAM:           The Chief Justice and La Forest, L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka,

Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.         

The application for a rehearing is granted on the issue of whether there should be a transition period, and the operation of that aspect of the judgment herein relating to the requirement for a warrant to effect an arrest in a dwelling is stayed for a period of 6 months from the date such judgment was issued, namely May 22, 1997.  The transition period will have effect throughout Canada but will have no application to the disposition that has been made or is to be made of the present case.

La demande de nouvelle audition est accordée relativement à la question de savoir s’il devrait y avoir une période transitoire, et la mise à exécution de cet aspect du jugement en cause ici relativement à l’exigence d’un mandat pour effectuer une arrestation dans une maison d’habitation est suspendue pour une période de 6 mois à compter du 22 mai 1997, date à laquelle ce jugement a été rendu.  La période transitoire s’appliquera partout au Canada, sans toutefois s’appliquer à la décision qui a été prise ou qui doit l’être en l’espèce.

JULY 3, 1997 / LE 3 JUILLET 1997

25769/25770/     The C.S.L. Group Inc., Voyageur Colonial Ltd., Continental Bank Capital Corporation,

25794               152155 Canada Inc., formerly Canadian Shipbuilding & Engineering Ltd. - v. - The St.Lawrence Seaway Authority and St.Lawrence and Adirondack Railway Company - and between - Furness Withy (Chartering) Ltd.; Misener Holdings Ltd., Misener Shipping Ltd. and James Richardson & Sons Ltd. C.O.B. as Pioneer Shipping; Fednav Limited, Belcan N.V. Federal Pacific (Liberia) Ltd. and Philippine Navigation Inc.; Canadian Forest Navigation Ltd.; McColl-Frontenac Inc.; J. Lauritzen A/S; Clipper Maritime Ltd.; Netubulk Ltd.; Merbridge Shipping Co. S.A. and Mount Healthy Shipping Corp.; Dorval Tankships Pty Ltd.; Forestships International Ltd.; Algoma Central Corporation; Marinus Smits; Carnay Company Naviera S.A.; Arne Blystad A/S and Rederi A/S Mimer; Emel Denizcilik ve Ticaret A.S.; Commodity Steel International Inc.; ULS International Inc.; Van Ommeren Bulk Shipping B.V.; The CSL Group Inc., Federal Commerce & Navigation Ltd. FFI (UK), Finance PLC, Finance For Shipping Ltd. and The Carlton Steamship Company Ltd. - v . - The St.Lawrence Seaway Authority and St.Lawrence and Adirondack Railway Company  - and between - American Home Assurance Company, Zurich Insurance Company, Royal Exchange Assurance Company (also known as Royal Exchange Assurance Company of America), Le Assicurazioni d’Italia, Kansa General Insurance Company and New Hamshire Insurance Company  - v. - The St.Lawrence Seaway Authority - and between - Hydro-Québec - v. - The St.Lawrence Seaway Authority (Que.)

CORAM:           The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed with costs.

The applications for leave to cross-appeal are dismissed.

Les demandes d'autorisation d'appel sont rejetées avec dépens.

Les demandes d'autorisation d'appel-incident sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Maritime law - Torts - Negligence - Damages - Commercial law - Contracts - Insurance - Civil Code of Lower Canada - Delict  - Recovery of pure economic loss - Applicable law - Whether an accident rendering a lift bridge in Valleyfield Québec inoperative and the damages resulting therefrom are governed by Canadian maritime law or the Québec civil law - Whether a contract existed between The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority and the maritime users of a lift bridge - Whether a public authority is not liable in tort for a claim of pure economic loss absent a specific statutory exception, bad faith or gross negligence, and uniqueness of the damages suffered - Whether article 1055 of the Civil Code of Lower Canada applied to create liability on the part of the bridge owner - Degree to which an appellate court may interfere in the findings of fact by a lower court - Kamloops (City of) v. Nielsen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 2 - ITO-International Terminal Operators v. Miida Electronics Inc., [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752 - Canadian National Railway Company v. Norsk Pacific Steamship Co., [1992] 1 S.C.R. 1021.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

September 22, 1993

Superior Court of Quebec

(Denis J.)

Action in warranty against D.B. and Canron, dismissed; [determination of issues of fact and law relevant to other proceedings]

December 3, 1996

Quebec Court of Appeal

(Beauregard, Mailhot and Fish JJ.A.)

Appeals by Users against VMSL and Adirondack, dismissed; Appeals by VMSL against American Home and D.B., granted; Appeal by VMSL against Canron, dismissed; Appeal by Adirondack (Hydro-Québec) against VMSL, dismissed; Cross-appeals by Adirondack and Canron as to costs, granted; Cross-appeals by VMSL and American Home as to costs, dismissed

January 27, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Applications for leave to appeal filed

February 20, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Applications for leave to cross-appeal filed

25799               WILLIAM MUCKALT - v. - WILLIAM ZAPF (B.C.)

CORAM:           The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs. The application for remand and the conditional application for leave to cross-appeal are dismissed without costs.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens. La demande de renvoi ainsi que la demande conditionnelle d’autorisation de former un appel incident sont rejetées sans dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Damages - Is a finding of carelessness sufficient to justify a finding that one participant was liable for the injuries sustained by another participant in the course of a competitive contact sporting event? - Is standard of care owed by one participant to another in a competitive contact sporting event is the same as the standard of care owed by one participant to another in a recreational non contact sporting event? - Did the British Columbia Court of Appeal err by either misinterpreting findings of fact or alternately by replacing the findings of fact with its own? - Assessment of special damages.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25807               ROYAL BANK OF CANADA - v. - THE KINGS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY (N.S.)

CORAM:           The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Contracts - Interpretation - Where an insurance policy lapses at the end of the term and the insured does to renew the policy, is the insurer required to give notice of termination to the insured’s mortgagee pursuant to the standard mortgage clause in the policy - Whether the standard mortgage clause in the policy brought the Applicant and the Respondent into privity under a separate contract of insurance - Whether the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal was bound by Bank of Nova Scotia v. Commercial Union Assurance Company of Canada (1993), 123 N.S.R. (2d) 58 despite Patterson v. Gallant, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1080.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25780               JOHN CAMPBELL AND SALVATORE SHIROSE - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:           The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Abuse of process - Stay of proceedings - Reverse sting operation - Whether the reverse sting operation was an abuse of process warranting a stay of proceedings - Disclosure - Solicitor-client privilege - Whether there was a solicitor-client relationship between an RCMP officer and a lawyer with the Crown law office who advised him concerning the reverse sting operation - Whether material regarding communications between the RCMP officer and the Crown lawyer ought to have been disclosed - Whether the Crown proved the conspiracy charged - Whether the Applicants’ sentences should have been reduced as a result of the “illegal” police conduct.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25580               MANSOUR AHANI v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (F.C.A.)

CORAM:           La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Immigration law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Civil - Convention refugee - Minister’s certificate - Inadmissible class described in the anti-terrorism provisions of Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.I-2 - Whether section 40.1 of the Immigration Act infringes or denies the rights guaranteed by sections 7 , 9 , or 10(c)  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  or is inoperative by virtue of subsection 2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25826               SAMUEL PARKINSON v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:           La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ.

The application for extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Hearsay - Whether the trial judge erred in admitting statements made by the complainant to the police shortly after the alleged offence on the basis that the statements were necessary because of the complainant’s ill health.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25852               DELTONIA R. COOK v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(B.C.)

CORAM:           La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est accordée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Evidence - Voluntary exculpatory statement obtained in breach of s. 10(b)  of the Charter  - S. 24(2)  Charter  application - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in ruling that the trial judge properly allowed the Applicant to be cross examined on an illegally obtained statement acquired in breach of his Charter  rights -  Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in ruling that the trial judge’s instruction to the jury as to the use they could make of the Applicant’s statement was adequate.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25922               HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. CORY ANTHONY GALLANT (Crim.)(P.E.I.)

CORAM:           La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est accordée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Trial within a reasonable time - Whether the right to be tried within a reasonable time includes the right to be sentenced within a reasonable time.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25931               HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. PATRICK ARNOLD MacDOUGALL (Crim.)(P.E.I.)

CORAM:           La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est accordée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Trial within a reasonable time - Whether the right to be tried within a reasonable time includes the right to be sentenced within a reasonable time.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25781               MARLAY CONSTRUCTION LTD. v. THE CITY OF MOUNT PEARL (Nfld.)

CORAM:           La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Municipal law - Applicant purchased lands from receiver - Was the Applicant obligated to complete the work of paving the subdivision streets which the defunct developer had agreed to - Did the Court of Appeal make palpable errors - Did the Court of Appeal err in failing to consider relevant issues and in refusing to order a re-hearing.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY