Bulletins

SUPREME COURT                                                       COUR SUPRÊME

          OF CANADA                                                              DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

          PROCEEDINGS   PROCÉDURES

April 18, 1997                                                   667 - 739                                                  le 18 avril 1997

CONTENTS                                                                                                               TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Yves Bisson

                Pierre Poupart

                c. (25821)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

                Stéphane Lamarche

                Subs. procureur général

DATE DE PRODUCTION 12.3.1997

Daniel John Shynuk

                Gregory P. Delbigio

                v. (25758)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

                A. G. of Canada

FILING DATE 17.3.1997

John Van Rooyen

                Bruce Duncan

                v. (25800)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

                A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 20.3.1997

Zurich Compagnie d’Assurances

                Paul A. Melançon

                Marchand, Magnan, Melançon, Forget

                c. (25878)

Robert Schachter et al. (Qué.)

                Robert J. Kandestin

                Kugler, Kandestin

DATE DE PRODUCTION 10.3.1997

Wesley Bobby Peters

                Robert Tapper, Q.C.

                Wolch, Pinx, Tapper, Scurfield

                v. (25879)

Her Majesty The Queen (Man.)

                A.G. of Manitoba

FILING DATE 11.3.1997

John Campbell et al.

                Alan D. Gold

                Gold & Fuerst

                v. (25780)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

                Fergus O’Donnell

                Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 17.3.1997

Dr. Philip I. Polimeni

                Dr. Philip I. Polimeni

                v. (25881)

Dr. Rudolph G. Danzinger et al. (Man.)

                Michael D. Werier

                D’Arcy & Deacon

FILING DATE 13.3.1997

James Hill et al.

                Holly J. Nikel

                Enfield, Adair, Wood & McEwen

                v. (25883)

Darla Smallwood et al. (Ont.)

                Vincent G. Burns

                McCaque, Wires, Peacock, Borlack

FILING DATE 10.3.1997

Dr. Cherry J. Pike et al.

                Richard Niedermayer

                Cox Downie

                v. (25889)

Quintin Dennis et al. (N.S.)

                Michael J. Wood

                Burchell, MacAdam & Hayman

FILING DATE 12.3.1997

Roger Callow

                Paul J. Conlin

                Conlin & McAlpin

                v. (25891)

The Board of School Trustees of School District No. 45 et al. (B.C.)

                Harris & Co.

FILING DATE 14.3.1997

Domic Condello

                David Layton

                v. (25893)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

                J.W. Leising

                Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 26.3.1997

Lucie St-Laurent

                André Carbonneau

                c. (25894)

Charles Soucy (Qué.)

                Pierre-Yves Morin

                Pariseau Cliché

DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.3.1997

Canada Southern Petroleum Ltd. et al.

                V.A. MacDonald

                MacDonald, McMahon

                v. (25895)

Amoco Canada Petroleum Co. Ltd. et al. (Alta.)

                R.A. McLennan, Q.C.

                McLennan, Ross

FILING DATE 18.3.1997

James Cecil Johnstone

                James Cecil Johnstone

                v. (25896)

British Columbia Maritime Employers Assoc. (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

                R. Patrick Saul

                Alexander Holburn Beaudin & Lang

FILING DATE 17.3.1997

Ontario New Home Warranty Program

                Michael W. Bader, Q.C.

                Cummings, Cooper, Schusheim & Berliner

                v. (25897)

Sunforest Investment Corp. et al. (Ont.)

                Kevin D. Sherkin

                Levine Sherkin Boussidan

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Florent Des Champs

                Denis J. Power, Q.C.

                Nelligan Power

                v. (25898)

Conseil des écoles séparées catholiques de langue française de Prescott-Russell et al. (Ont.)

                Paul S. Rouleau

                Genest Murray Desbrisay Lamek

FILING DATE 13.3.1997

Alfred Abouchar

                Denis J. Power, Q.C.

                Nelligan Power

                v. (25899)

Conseil scolaire de langue française d’Ottawa-Carleton -- Section publique et al. (Ont.)

                Paul S. Rouleau

                Genest Murray Desbrisay Lamek

FILING DATE 18.3.1997

Bernard Lécuyer

                Olivier Prat, c.r.

                de Grandpré, Godin

                c. (25900)

Le sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec (Qué.)

                Pierre Séguin

                Veillette & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 17.3.1997

Wigmore Consultants Ltd. et al.

                Daniel Tapp

                v. (25901)

Her Majesty The Queen (Sask.)

                Horst Dahlem, Q.C.

                Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 17.3.1997

S. Bryant Smith

                S. Bryant Smith

                v. (25902)

New Brunswick Human Rights Commission (N.B.)

                R. Bruce Eddy, Q.C.

                Eddy, Young, Hoyt & Downs

FILING DATE 24.3.1997

Lillian Dorfman

                Stanley C. Ehrlich

                v. (25903)

The National Trust Co. (Ont.)

                A. Irvin Schein

                Minden, Gross, Grafstein & Greenstein

FILING DATE 20.3.1997

Michael Conan Lewandowski

                David Torske

                Legal Aid Youth Office

                v. (25905)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

                Elizabeth Hughes

                Alberta Justice

FILING DATE 21.3.1997

Clarence Harnden et al.

                John C.F. Hunt

                Black, Sutherland, Crabbe

                v. (25907)

Paul Kosir (Ont.)

                Melvin I. Antflyck

                Antflyck & Mazin

FILING DATE 21.3.1997

Paul Bérard

                Pierre Sylvestre

                Sylvestre, Charbonneau, Fafard

                c. (25908)

Compagnie Montréal Trust et al. (Qué.)

                Sylvain A. Vauclair

                McCarthy Tétrault

DATE DE PRODUCTION 24.3.1997

Marie-Cécile Windisch-Laroche

                Michel Morissette

                Morissette, Downs

                c. (25911)

Jacques Biron et al. (Qué.)

                Palais de Justice

DATE DE PRODUCTION 24.3.1997

Les Investissements Imqua Inc.

                Odette Lacroix

                Aubut Chabot

                c. (25765)

Ville de Québec (Qué.)

                Roch Simard

                Boutin, Roy & Assoc.

DATE DE PRODUCTION 26.3.1997

Peter Bruce Gunn

                Alexander D. Pringle, Q.C.

                Pringle, Renouf, MacDonald & Assoc.

                v. (25912)

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

                Jack Watson, Q.C.

                Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 27.3.1997

County of Athabasca No. 12

                Richard D. McNally

                v. (25913)

Lloyd Lachance (Alta.)

                Burke-Robertson

FILING DATE 27.3.1997

3044190 Canada Inc.

                Yves Poirier

                de Grandpré, Godin

                c. (25914)

Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

                Benoît Belleau

                Bernard, Roy & Assoc.

DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.3.1997

Paul Fitzpatrick

                Bruce Duncan

                v. (25819)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

                A.G. of Ontario

                Crown Law Office - Criminal

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Marc Brunel Belhomme

                Marc Brunel Belhomme

                c. (25915)

Joceline Hermine Valcin et al. (Qué.)

                Guy & Gilbert

DATE DE PRODUCTION 18.3.1997

Veronika Hublall, carrying on business under the firm name and style of Ronnie’s Hair Salon

                Jerome H. Stanleigh

                v. (25916)

Wilma Mills (Ont.)

                V. Charles Anipare

FILING DATE 27.3.1997

Elias Malka

                Avram Fishman

                Goldstein, Flanz & Fishman

                c. (25918)

Max B. Druker et al. (Qué.)

                Jean-Philippe Gervais

                Gervais & Assoc.

DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.3.1997

Elias Malka et al.

                Avram Fishman

                Goldstein, Flanz & Fishman

                c. (25919)

Druker et Assoc. Inc. et al. (Qué.)

                Jean-Philipppe Gervais

                Gervais & Assoc.

DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.3.1997

Beverly Cook

                Simon Lahaie

                Alarie, Legault & Assoc.

                c. (25920)

Michael Edward Keeper (Qué.)

                François Leduc

DATE DE PRODUCTION 9.4.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

                Douglas R. Drysdale

                Carr, Stevenson & MacKay

                v. (25922)

Cory Anthony Gallant (P.E.I.)

                W. Kent Brown, Q.C.

                Legal Aid Office

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

René Paquet et al.

                Jacques Larochelle

                c. (25923)

Procureur général du Québec et al. (Qué.)

                Jacques Gauvin

                Subs. procureur général

DATE DE PRODUCTION 1.4.1997

The Government of the Northwest Territories

                B.A. Crane, Q.C.

                Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

                v. (25924)

Public Service Alliance of Canada et al. (F.C.A.)

                Raven, Jewitt & Allen

FILING DATE 4.4.1997

Owen Wayne Lloyd

                R.S. Prithipaul

                Gunn & Prithipaul

                v. (25925)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

                Arnold Schlayer

                A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Gaétan Delisle

                James R.K. Duggan

                c. (25926)

The Attorney General of Canada (Qué.)

                Raymond Piché

                Ministère fédéral de la Justice

DATE DE PRODUCTION 1.4.1997

David Michael Savory

                James Lockyer

                Pinkofsky, Lockyer

                v. (25927)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

                John North

                Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Narinder Lal

                J.L. McDougall, Q.C.

                Fraser & Beatty

                v. (25928)

Dr. Sultan Alvi et al. (Ont.)

                Stephen M. Grant

                Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

FILING DATE 4.4.1997

Castlepoint Development Corp. et al.

                Martin J. Henderson

                Aird & Berlis

                v. (25930)

James Barber McLeod et al. (Ont.)

                Robert L. Colson

                Teplitsky, Colson

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

                Douglas R. Drysdale

                Carr, Stevenson & MacKay

                v. (25931)

Patrick Arnold MacDougall (P.E.I.)

                W. Kent Brown, Q.C.

                Legal Aid Office

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

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

                John S. McNeil, Q.C.

                Fellowes, McNeil

                v. (25932)

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

                William G. Scott

                McCarthy, Tétrault

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Robert Walton

                Robert Walton

                v. (25933)

Annie Walton (Ont.)

                Richard W. Shields

FILING DATE 2.4.1997

Health Services Association of the South Shore

                Eric B. Durnford, Q.C.

                McInnes, Cooper & Robertson

                v. (25934)

Health Services Association of the South Shore Local of the Nova Scotia Nurses’ Union (N.S.)

                Raymond Larkin, Q.C.

                Pink, Breen, Larkin

FILING DATE 1.4.1997

Thierry Guggisberg

                Martin Vauclair

                Hébert, Bourque & Downs

                c. (25935)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

                Gérard Milot

                Subs. du procureur général

DATE DE PRODUCTION 8.4.1997

Ghislain Norman Levesque

                Edward Tawkin

                Tawkin Law Office

                v. (25936)

The Health Sciences Centre (Man.)

                Michael T. Green

                Thompson Dorfman Sweatman

FILING DATE 7.4.1997

The Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees

                Georges Marceau

                Melançon, Marceau, Grenier et Sciortino

                c. (25937)

Compagnie des chemins de fer nationaux du Canada et al. (Qué.)

                John A. Coleman

                Ogilvy, Renault

DATE DE PRODUCTION 3.4.1997

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

                Bruce Laughton

                Laughton & Company

                v. (25938)

British Columbia Maritime Employers Association (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

                Tom Roper

                Alexander Holburn & Co.

FILING DATE 3.4.1997

Gerald Bernard Klassen

                Manuel A. Azevedo

                Azevedo and Associates

                v. (25939)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

                Richard C.C. Peck, Q.C.

                Peck & Tammer

FILING DATE 7.4.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

                Richard A. Saull

                Manitoba Justice

                v. (25940)

Jozef Arsiuta (Man.)

                Ken McCaffrey

                Criminal Trial Centre

FILING DATE 9.4.1997

Gary Rainthorpe

                Barry L. Evans

                v. (25941)

David Rice (Ont.)

                Bess V. Fotopoulos

                Sloan

FILING DATE 4.4.1997

MARCH 27, 1997 / LE 27 MARS 1997

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                                         Michael Vukelich

                                                                                                v. (25544)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Exclusion of evidence - Whether a trial judge can refuse to hold a voir dire to consider Charter  applications - Evidence - Co-conspirators exception to the hearsay rule - Whether the trial judge erred in not instructing the jury on the co-conspirators exception to the hearsay rule.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

May 12,  1994

Supreme Court of British Columbia (Hall J.)

Conviction: conspiracy to import and traffic in cocaine

July 10, 1996

Court of Appeal for British Columbia

McEachern C.J.B.C., Southin and Cumming JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

November 27, 1996

Supreme Court of Canada (L’Heureux-Dubé J.)

Motion for the extension of time granted

December 30, 1996

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                                                     Pierre Joseph Mathieu

                                                                                                v. (25614)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Sexual assault - Complainant’s sexual history - Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 276.1  - Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit the Applicant’s statement to the police for the purpose of the s. 276.1 application after he had refused to admit the statement in the trial proper - Whether an accused who testifies on a s. 276.1 application can be cross-examined regarding the events forming the subject matter of the charge against him - Whether psychological harm is sufficient to constitute bodily harm in a charge of sexual assault causing bodily harm, and if so, whether the evidence in this case was sufficient to establish psychological harm amounting to bodily harm.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

June 15, 1995

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta (Chrumka J.)

Conviction: sexual assault causing bodily harm

October 31, 1996

Court of Appeal for Alberta

(McClung, Hunt JJ.A. and Fraser J.)

Appeal dismissed

January 7, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal and motion for the extension of time filed

                                                                                    Her Majesty The Queen

                                                                                                v. (25732)

                                                                   Wesbrook Management Ltd. (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation -  Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure), Rule 58(1)(a), determination of a question of law - Whether the Respondent was properly assessed pursuant to ss. 159(3)  of the Income Tax Act , S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

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

Mark Oppenheim, Attorney in Fact for Certain Non-Marine Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, Certain Marine Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London,

V.W. Broad and Other Syndicate 370

                                                                                                        et

                                                    Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd., Star Assurance Society Ltd.

                                                                                                        et

                                                  Münchener Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft (“Munich Re”)

                                                                                                        et

St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. (UK) Ltd., Sphere Drake Insurance PLC, Scor (UK) Reinsurance Co. Ltd., Prudential Assurance Co. Ltd., Guardian Royal Exchange Ass. PLC, Unionamerica Insurance Co. Ltd., Sovereign Marine & General Insurance Company Limited, Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance Company (UK) Limited, Taisho Marine & Fire Insurance Company (Europe) Limited, Uni Storebrand Insurance Company (UK) Limited, Wausau Insurance Company (UK) Limited, Alibingia Versicherungen, Anglo American Insurance Company Limited, Trinity Insurance Company Limited, Assicurazioni Generali SPA

                                                                                                c. (25547)

                                                                            ABN Amro Bank Canada (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - Certificat d’appel déserté - Rétractation de jugement - Article 503.1 du Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q., c. C-25 - Intimée relevée de son défaut de produire un mémoire d’appel dans le délai imparti - La Cour d’appel avait-elle juridiction ou le pouvoir en vertu de l’article 523 C.p.c. de relever l’intimée du défaut de produire son mémoire dans le délai impératif de quinze jours prescrit par l’article 511 C.p.c., compte tenu des conséquences juridiques expresses et automatiques prévues par l’article 503.1 C.p.c.? - Si la Cour d’appel avait un tel pouvoir ou juridiction, ce qui est nié par les demandeurs, l’a-t-elle exercé judiciairement?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:    La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Gonthier et Major

                                                                                             Murray Ryan

                                                                                                v. (25704)

The Corporation of the City of Victoria, The Esquimalt and Nanaimo Railway Company and Canadian Pacific Limited/Canadien Pacifique Limitée (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts -Negligence - Nuisance - Defence of Statutory Authority - Whether railways should benefit from special rules regarding the defence of statutory authority and regarding the common law of nuisance.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                    Altoba Development Ltd.

                                                                                                v. (25759)

                                                                                        SaskPower (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Building contracts - Tender calls - Action for breach of contract - Did the trial judge err in finding that the Applicant’s tender failed to comply with the terms of the call for tenders.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

Larry Grail

                                                                                                v. (25702)

Deborah Ordon, the Executrix of the estate of Bernard Myron Ordon and the said Deborah Ordon,

personally, Jeffrey Michael Ordon, a Minor, by his litigation guardian, Deborah Ordon, Stephanie Ordon,

a Minor by her Litigation guardian, Deborah Ordon, Bessie Ordon and Ordon’s Building Centre Ltd.

AND BETWEEN:

                                Christopher Hogarth, Murray Hogarth, Diana Ruth Hogarth, Pioneer Petroleums Inc., Ontario Holidays Corporation, The Edenvale Inn, Josephine Perry and John Haller

v.

John Emmett Hall, Frances Norma Hall, Susan Frances Hall, E. Bruce Hall, John Peter Hall, by his committee Maureen Hall, Maureen Hall as Executrix of the estate of Yvonne Louise Carroll, Maureen Hall in her personal capacity, Martha Isabel Hall, Thomas James Hall, David Robert Hall, Richard Lawrence Carroll, Marie Helena Carroll, John Gregory Carroll, Margaret Jane Carroll, Marie Suzanne Carroll, Joan Shelagh Carroll and Laing Douglas Carroll

AND BETWEEN:

Christopher Hogarth, Murray Hogarth, Diana Ruth Hogarth, Pioneer Petroleums Inc., Edenvale Inn or Edenvale and Ontario Holidays Corporation, carrying on business as

the Edenvale Inn or Edenvale

- and -

Josephine Perry

AND BETWEEN:

Murray Hogarth, Christopher Hogarth, Diana Ruth Hogarth, Pioneer Petroleums Inc. and Ontario Holidays Corporation carrying on business as the Edenvale Inn,

Josephine Perry and John Haller

- and -

Joanne Maude Perry, William George Perry, William Harold Perry, Janet Ellen MacPhee, Ian Forbes Perry, Susan Joanne Perry, Leslie Carol Perry, Tara Colleen Boyle, Lindsay Patrick Perry, Roberta Joanne Perry, an infant, by her Litigation Guardian, Joanne Maude Perry, and Josephine Perry, in her capacity as Administratrix of the Estate of Grant Kevin Perry (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Maritime law - Shipping - Jurisdiction - Limitation of actions - prescription - Does the Ontario Court (General Division) have concurrent original jurisdiction with the Federal Court in claims for wrongful death brought pursuant to s. 646 in Part XIV of the Canada Shipping Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. S-9  - Did the Court of Appeal err when it decided that certain parts of provincial legislation applied to supplement the provisions of the Canada Shipping Act  - Whether the limitation period in s. 649  of the Canada Shipping Act  can be extended at the discretion of a court.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                             Lajos Balogh

                                                                                                v. (25752)

                                                                                       Emma Balogh (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Divorce - Maintenance - Childless marriage where both parties worked throughout the course of the marriage - Applicant, an engineer, capable of earning more than the Respondent, a nurses’ aid - Entitlement to spousal support - Where the payor spouse is unemployed for legitimate reasons at the time of the trial is lump sum support appropriate?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

November 20, 1996

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(McMurtry C.J.O., Catzman and Osborne JJ.A.)

Appeal allowed in part: inter alia order of trial judge varied to require Applicant to pay lump sum spousal support

January 17, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                                            The Attorney General of Ontario

                                                                                                v. (25838)

                                                                                           M. and H. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom - Family law - Maintenance - Definition of “spouse” pursuant to s. of the Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3 - Same-sex respondents living together in relationship resembling that of marriage for twelve years - Relationship engendering economic dependancy of one party on the other - Respondents separating with majority of the personal and business assets retained by non-dependant party - Whether dependant party entitled to make a claim for interim and permanent support pursuant to the Family Law Act - Whether statutory definition of spouse should be broadened to include same-sex couples - Charter of Rights  - Whether dependant party’s s. 15(1) rights violated by spousal definition that does not include same-sex relationships - Whether violation under s.15(1) can be justified under s.1 - Procedural law - Costs - Whether Appellant, Attorney General, should bear the costs of appeal against successful litigant where neither party to the action has requested leave to appeal - Whether leave to appeal should be conditional on Attorney General paying Respondent, M’s  costs of appeal - Whether the suspended declaration, the denial of a personal exemption and the refusal to order costs of the appeal below are legal questions of national importance.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

APRIL 4, 1997 / LE 4 AVRIL 1997

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                                          Roman Paryniuk

                                                                                                v. (25779)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Right to counsel - Right to be informed  of reason for detention - Whether Applicant’s right pursuant to s. 10(a)  of the Charter  was infringed - Whether Applicant’s right pursuant to s. 10(b)  was infringed - Whether the Applicant’s right pursuant to s. 7  of the Charter  was infringed - Whether the Applicant’s statements should be excluded pursuant to s. 24(2)  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                         C. Robert Ivey, Maziv Industries, Ltd. and INECO, Ltd.

                                                                                                v. (25664)

                                                                             United States of America (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

International law - Conflict of laws - Procedural law - Civil Procedure - Judgments and Orders - Motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 20 of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure -  Enforcement of foreign judgment - United States judgment ordering Applicants to pay the cost of cleaning up waste disposal site pursuant to their liability under United States environmental legislation.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

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

                                                                         La Mutuelle-Vie des Fonctionnaires

                                                                                                c. (25701)

                                                                 Madame Micheline Lapointe-Boucher (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial - Assurance - Déclaration de risque - Fausse déclaration - Bonne foi - En matière de fausses déclarations et de réticences dans une proposition d’assurance-vie, l’assureur qui n’invoque pas spécifiquement, dans l’avis initial de refus de couverture à la suite du décès, tous les moyens à l’appui de ce refus, se rend-il forclos de les plaider et d’en faire la preuve? - L’assureur doit-il faire la preuve que le proposant connaissait le diagnostic précis et la maladie qu’on lui reproche de ne pas avoir déclarée dans la proposition d’assurance? - L’obligation d’extrême bonne foi du proposant est-elle liée à ses connaissances scientifiques?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 3 mars 1993

Cour supérieure du Québec (Corriveau J.C.S.)

Action en réclamation d’une indemnité d’assurance rejetée

Le 24 octobre 1996

Cour d’appel du Québec (Beauregard [dissident], Baudouin et Robert JJ.C.A.)

Appel accueilli; appel incident rejeté

Le 20 décembre 1996

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée

CORAM: La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Gonthier et Major

                                                                                    Saskatoon City Hospital

                                                                                                v. (25757)

                                                                      Saskatchewan Union of Nurses (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Judicial Review - Standard of Review - Contracts - Interpretation of a collective agreement - Anti-discrimination clauses - Applicability of jurisprudence under the Charter  and human rights legislation to an interpretation of an anti-discrimination clause in a collective agreement - Whether declining to extend a normal retirement age for fiscal reasons constitutes discrimination on the basis of age.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                              Mavis Baker

                                                                                                v. (25823)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Immigration - Administrative law - Judicial review - Appeal - Jurisdiction - Whether federal immigration authorities treat the best interests of the Canadian child as a primary consideration in assessing an applicant under s. 114(2) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.I-2 - Whether s.83 of the Immigration Act precludes consideration of questions not certified by the Trial Division judge - Whether an international convention must be expressly implemented by statute in order to have legal effect in Canada - Whether compliance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child would fetter the Minister’s discretion under s.114(2) of the Immigration Act - Interpretation and application of Articles 3, 9 and 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

                                                                                    Her Majesty The Queen

                                                                                                v. (25738)

                                                                       Henry Gerard Cuerrier (Crim.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Aggravated assault - Consent - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to find that where an accused has unprotected sexual intercourse with another person, knowing that he is HIV positive and deliberately deceiving his partner about his HIV status, the consent obtained is vitiated by fraud, is not informed consent, is vitiated by reason of public policy, or the scope of the consent is exceeded.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                    James Cecil Johnstone

                                                                                                v. (25896)

                                                      British Columbia Maritime Employers Association (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Pre-trial procedure - Choice of Counsel - Dismissal of action for undue delay.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION -- REHEARING /

DEMANDE DE RÉEXAMEN -- NOUVELLE AUDITION

CORAM: Chief Justice Lamer and Gonthier and Iacobucci JJ. /

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Gonthier et Iacobucci

Canderel Limited v. Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(Ont.)(24663)

APRIL 8, 1997 / LE 8 AVRIL 1997

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

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

                                                                                         Bernard St-Aubin

                                                                                                c. (25764)

                                                                              Le Curateur public du Québec

                                                                                                        et

                                                                                           Rosaire Théorêt

                                                                                                        et

                                                                                   Le Club juridique (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédures - Procédure civile - Appel - Requête de l’intimé pour être autorisé à vendre l’immeuble du demandeur accueillie -  Requête du demandeur pour permission d’appel rejetée - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle commis une erreur en rejetant la requête pour permission d’appel du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 16 septembre 1996

Cour supérieure du Québec (Flynn J.C.S.)

Requête de l’intimé pour être autorisé à vendre l’immeuble du demandeur accueillie

Le 18 novembre 1996

Cour d’appel du Québec (Deschamps J.C.A.)

Requête du demandeur pour permission d’appel rejetée

Le 15 janvier 1997

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée

APRIL 11, 1997 / LE 11 AVRIL 1997

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                                                    T.E.M.

                                                                                                v. (25734)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Counsel’s address to the jury - Whether the Crown’s address prejudiced the Applicant or deprived him of a fair trial - Whether the trial judge erred in not correcting or clarifying the Crown’s address - Whether there was a miscarriage of justice.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                       Ernest A.J. Hawrish

                                                                                                v. (25748)

                                                       Lyle Cundall, Harvey Walker, and Wilson Olive (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Statutes - Interpretation - Does a self-governing professional body have the jurisdiction to regulate the termination of the membership of a non-practising member? - Can a self-governing professional body interpret its own rules to be void and of no effect, where it has acted upon and had the benefit of those rules, and where such interpretation is to its benefit? - The Legal Profession Act, 1990, S.S. 1990-91 c. L- 10.1.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 9, 1995

Hearing Committee of the Law Society of Saskatchewan

Rule 1101(1) of The Rules of The Law Society of Saskatchewan is ultra vires

November 18, 1996

Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

(Bayda C.J., Vancise and Wakeling JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

January 16, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                        Physique Health Club Ltd. carrying on business under

                                                                 the name and style of Physique Fitness Store

                                                                                                v. (25767)

Glenn Carlsen, Jeanne Carlsen and Fitness Equipment of Calgary Ltd. (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Fiduciary obligation - Nephew hired to run store for uncle’s business and quitting without notice following dispute about compensation - Applicant awarded damages for breach of fiduciary duty by trial judge, but order set aside by Court of Appeal - Proper analytical model regarding the law of fiduciary duty with respect to a key management employee - What type of economic information constitutes confidential information of law - Fiduciary’s predatory competition during the notice period.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                  Avis Immobilien G.M.B.H.

                                                                                                v. (25749)

                                                                       Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Deduction of foreign exchange loss - Whether foreign exchange loss amount Applicant paid to Bank was an outlay or expense “made or incurred...for the purpose of making the disposition” within the meaning of s. 40(1) (a)(i) of the Income Tax Act,  R.S.C. 1985 (5th supp.) c. 1  and therefore deductible in computing capital gain from the disposition of properties.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

January 5, 1994

Tax Court of Canada (Rip J.)

Applicant’s appeal from Minister’s  assessment under the Income Tax Act  dismissed

November 14, 1996

Federal Court of Appeal

(Hugessen, Décary and Chevalier JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

January 13, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

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

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

                          Coopérative de Commerce “Des Mille-Îles”, André Malo, Paul Bélanger, Pierre Laporte

                                                                                                c. (25703)

                                Société des alcools du Québec (S.A.Q.) et le Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Couronne - Droit commercial - Droit administratif - Responsabilité civile - Contrats - Obligation -  Injonction - Dommages-intérêts - Appel d’offres au public - Vente de succursales de la Société des alcools du Québec - Injonction permanente - Responsabilité de l’état - Dommages moraux - Exécution forcée de l’obligation de livrer une succursale - Tentative avortée de privatiser un certain nombre de succursales de la Société des alcools du Québec - Un contrat a-t-il été valablement formé entre la Société des alcools du Québec et les demandeurs, soumissionnaires, compte tenu que les décisions du Conseil des ministres remplacent celles du Conseil du trésor? - Le gouvernement et la Société des alcools du Québec sont-ils responsables en dommages à l’égard des demandeurs? - Application de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q. c. C-12, et de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Entente de procéder au moyen d’une cause-type - Effet d’un jugement dans une cause-type.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 28 février 1994

Cour supérieure du Québec (Trudeau j.c.s.)

Action des demandeurs accueillie en partie

Le 23 août 1996

Cour d’appel du Québec

(Lebel, Tourigny et Proulx jj.c.a.)

Appel principal des demandeurs rejeté; appel incident de la Société des alcools du Québec accueilli

Le 19 décembre 1996

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel et demande de prorogation de délai déposées

CORAM: La Forest, Gonthier and Major JJ. /

Les juges La Forest, Gonthier et Major

                                                                                     Paul Franklin Watson

                                                                                                v. (25768)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Defence - Applicant convicted of unlawfully acting as a master of a vessel, without being the holder of a valid master’s certificate contrary to section 8(1)(a) of the Ships Deck Watch Regulations - Can the Court of Appeal reverse a finding of fact - Is a reasonable mistake of a regulation an excuse or defence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                    Her Majesty The Queen

                                                                                                v. (25777)

                                                                       Gregory Jacob Parsons (Crim.)(Nfld.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Hearsay Evidence - Whether all of the hearsay evidence should have been admitted at trial where much of it was repetitive - Whether the necessity requirement for hearsay evidence involves a consideration of the amount of evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                      Eileen Grace Bahlsen

                                                                                                v. (25783)

                               Her Majesty The Queen as represented by the Minister of Transport (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Civil rights - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal misapplied the minimal impairment branch of the proportionality test under s.1  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal effectively reversed the burden of proving that a limitation under s.15  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  was demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society - Whether cases in employment law under human rights legislation should have been applied - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law by effectively reversing the onus under s.1  of the Charter.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                   Barbican Properties Inc.

                                                                                                v. (25760)

                                                                       Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the Tax Court erred in its interpretation and application of paragraphs 20(1) (c) and 18(1) (i) of the Income Tax Act .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

                                                                                      Helen Marie Bottrell

                                                                                                v. (25789)

                                                                               Herbert Bruce Bottrell (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Division of Property - Maintenance - Evidence - Applicant wife’s counter-petition for division of family assets pursuant to Family Relations Act,  R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 121, and maintenance dismissed - Little or unsatisfactory evidence to support her claims - Protracted proceedings - Failure on part of Applicant’s counsel to take advantage of numerous opportunities to present evidence - Evidence deficient in any event - Whether Court of Appeal erred in deciding that trial judge did not err in law and in misapprehending the evidence before him - Whether Court of Appeal erred in deciding that the rulings of the trial judge were solely in his discretion and that the discretion was properly exercised.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                              Ninal Kadenko, Boris Fedosov, Alexander Fedosov et Mila Fedosov

                                                                                                c. (25689)

                                                Le Ministre de la citoyenneté et de l’immigration (C.A.F.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Immigration - Revendication du statut de réfugié - Citoyens d’Israël d’origine ukrainienne et de religion chrétienne - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en concluant que le refus de certains policiers d’intervenir ne saurait en lui-même rendre l’État incapable de le faire? - A-t-elle erré en tenant pour acquis que l’État d’Israël possède des institutions politiques et judiciaires capables de protéger ses citoyens? - A-t-elle erré en statuant que le fardeau de preuve qui incombe au revendicateur sur la question de la capacité de l’État de protéger ses ressortissants est directement proportionnel au degré de démocratie atteint chez l’État en cause? - Canada (Procureur général) c. Ward, [1993] 2 R.C.S. 689.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                             Walter Koszil

                                                                                                v. (25730)

                                                                             National Bank of Canada (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Banks/banking operations - Loan - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing find a fiduciary duty owed by a bank to a borrower - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to hold the applicant had a right to call a chartered accountant as an expert witness - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in basing their decision on findings of credibility adverse to the applicant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in restricting their consideration of the evidence to events up to about the end of November, 1979.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

December 16, 1994

Supreme Court of British Columbia (Bouck J.)

Respondent’s claim allowed; Applicant’s counterclaim dismissed

November 5, 1996

Court of Appeal for British Columbia

(Southin, Donald, Newbury JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

December 20, 1996

Court of Appeal for British Columbia

(Southin, Donald and Newbury JJ.A.)

Application for rehearing dismissed

January 6, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

Canada Southern Petroleum Ltd., Magellan Petroleum Corporation and

 Pantepec International, Inc.

v. (25895)

Amoco Canada Petroleum Company Ltd., Amoco Production Company, Amoco Canada Resources Ltd., (formely Dome Petroleum Limited), Anderson Oil and Gas Inc. (formely Columbia Gas Development of Canada Ltd.), Mobil Oil Canada, Ltd., Imperial Oil Resources Limited (formerly Esso Resources Canada Limited ), Mobil Resources Ltd. and Mobil Oil Canada Properties

- and -

Anderson Oil and Canada Inc. (formely Columbia Gas Development of Canada Ltd., Mobil Resources Ltd. (formely Canadian Superior Oil Ltd.), Imperial Oil Resources Limited (formely Esso Resources Canada Limited), Mobil Oil Canada Ltd., Allied-Signal Inc., Home Oil Company Limited, Kern County Land Company and Mobil Oil Canada Properties

- and -

Imperial Oil Limited and Esso Resources Canada Limited (now Imperial Oil Resources Limited)

- and -

Canada Southern Petroleum Ltd.

- and -

Columbia Gas Development of Canada Ltd., Dome Petroleum Limited, Amoco Canada Petroleum  Company Ltd., Mobil Oil Canada Ltd., and Esso Resources of Canada Ltd. (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour Law - Law of Professions - Choice of Counsel - Conflict of Interest - Solicitor transfers to another firm that is representing opponents to a former client of the solicitor in civil litigation - Whether solicitor’s new firm should be allowed to continue to represent the former client’s opponents.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

December 17, 1996

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta (Moore C.J.)

Application to allow continuance of choice of counsel granted

February 25, 1997

Court of Appeal of Alberta

(O’Leary, Picard and Hunt JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

March 18, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION -- REHEARING /

DEMANDE DE RÉEXAMEN -- NOUVELLE AUDITION

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et McLachlin

1.  Salvatore Gramaglia v. Sunlife Trust Co. et al. (Alta.)(25446)

APRIL 3, 1997 / LE 3 AVRIL 1997

25811HELMUT OBERLANDER  v.  THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION  and between  JOHANN DUECK  v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION  and between  ERICHS TOBIASS  v.  THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION (Ont.)

CORAM:              The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

                The applications for leave to appeal are granted, on the condition that the appeal be ready to be heard in the Spring session of 1997.

                Les demandes d’autorisation de pourvoi sont accueillies, à la condition que le pourvoi soit prêt à être entendu au cours de la session du printemps de 1997.

NATURE OF THE CASES

Procedural Law - Courts - Judges - Independence of judiciary - Reasonable apprehension of bias - Remedies - Stays of proceedings - Procedure on References to the Courts in order to revoke citizenship pursuant to Citizenship Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. C‐29  - Role of a Chief Justice - Whether ex parte meeting and correspondence between an Assistant Deputy Attorney General of the Department of Justice of the Government of Canada and the Chief Justice of Federal Court regarding Applicants’ cases, and an intervention by the Chief Justice of the Federal Court in the cases, raised a reasonable apprehension of bias and warranted stays of proceedings.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25859CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, CLAUDE VICKERY, HANNAH GARTNER, HARVEY CASHORE AND DAN O’CONNELL  v.  THE HONOURABLE JUDGE JEAN-LOUIS BATIOT AND GERALD AUGUSTINE REGAN (N.S.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

                The application for leave to appeal and all related applications are dismissed.

                La demande d’autorisation d’appel et toutes autres demandes connexes sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedural law - Canadian Charter  - Criminal - Pre-trial procedure - Subpoenas duces tecum - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Third parties ordered to bring records in their possession to the preliminary inquiry. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

September 20, 1996

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

(Glube C.J.S.C.)

Application for certiorari dismissed; application (inter partes) for an order in the nature of mandamus granted, subpoena(s) duces tecum shall issue in accordance with section 700(1) and Form 16 of the Criminal Code , including the requirement to produce

February 13, 1997

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

(Freeman, Roscoe and Bateman JJ.A.)

Appeal allowed on the issuance of the subpoenas duces tecum and matter remitted to Batiot J.;  appeal in respect of the issuance of the subpoenas dismissed

25711RICHARD JAMES SOCOBASIN v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(N.S.)

CORAM:              L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Iacobucci 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 - Juries - Whether the trial judge erred in allowing the trial to proceed with only 11 jurors.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25648MICHELINE SAVARIE c. LE PROCUREUR GÉNÉRAL DU CANADA (C.A.F.)(Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka et Iacobucci

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

                The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.       

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Assurance-chômage - Contrôle judiciaire - Législation - Interprétation de l’expression “en raison de” du paragraphe 58(9) du Règlement sur l’assurance-chômage, C.R.C., ch. 1576 - Répartition de la somme reçue par la demanderesse au titre des congés de maladie non utilisés en raison de la cessation de son emploi - La Cour d’appel féderale a-t-elle erré en décidant que les sommes reçues par la demanderesse, à titre de congés monnayables, l’avait été en raison de la cessation de son emploi et non en raison de la convention collective?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

APRIL 10, 1997 / LE 10 AVRIL 1997

25676PETRO CANADA INC. AND GULF CANADA LIMITED  v.  CITY OF VANCOUVER (B.C.)

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

Property Law - Real Property - Injurious Affection - Proper test to determine whether damage would have been actionable at law but for the authority’s statutory powers when determining if a claim for injurious affection arises - Whether changes to a roadway represented public inconvenience or interference with private access to the roadway. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25677FRANCO FALSO  v.  FURIO DE STEFANIS AND HEAN, WYLIE, PEACH, DE STEFANIS (B.C.)

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

Procedural law - Appeal - In the circumstances, did the Court of Appeal err in refusing to extend the time for appealing the dismissal of an action in order for the Applicant time to instruct and retain counsel?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25656DANIEL CHARLAND  v.  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Alta.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

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

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Jury Charge - Exhortation - Whether trial judge erred in telling the jury that they should take their time in reaching a verdict - Whether trial judge erred in not reviewing evidence  for jury - Whether trial judge erred in not using “W.(D.)” formulation when instructing jury on credibility.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25766MOHAMED RAFEEK ALI  v.  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

                The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

                La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Judicial Interim Release - Bail - What is the correct standard of review to be applied by the Court of Appeal when reviewing an order for release or detention - What factors should be considered by the Court of Appeal when reviewing an order of release or detention - Was the Court of Appeal correct in drawing inferences from hearsay and chastising the Applicant’s right to silence by findings made in the absence of testimony by the Applicant - Was the trial judge correct in exercising his discretion pursuant to s. 518(1) (a) of the Criminal Code  in order to allow him to examine the Applicant - Was the learned trial judge correct in exercising his discretion under Rule 2.02 of the Criminal Rules of Procedure to exclude the Applicant’s affidavit originally submitted with his application for bail - Is Rule 20, which requires the Applicant to file an affidavit, in direct contravention of ss. 7 , 11 , and 13  of the Charter - Can the Crown elicit evidence de novo at the hearing of the bail appeal - What is the correct test for judicial interim release.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 20, 1996

Ontario Court (Provincial Division) (Stong J.)

Applicant released on bail with conditions

November 4, 1996

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Labrosse, Doherty and Abella JJ.A.)

Release order set aside and an order directing the detention of the Applicant substituted

January 3, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

25658ERICO CARDOSO v. JAMES DOUGLAS BUDD (Man.)

CORAM:               L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Iacobucci 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

Procedural law - Limitation of actions - Evidence - Actions - Whether the discoverability principle should and can be interpreted to allow litigants to await the opinion of an expert before the litigant is found to have knowledge of the material facts on which to base a cause of action - Does the limitation period only begin after the receipt of an expert opinion asserting the existence of a claim despite the litigant already having knowledge of material facts or access to the material facts, including the advice of other experts.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25686BRIAN THOMPSON v. DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE CHIROPRACTORS’ ASSOCIATION OF SASKATCHEWAN and BOARD OF CHIROPRACTORS’ ASSOCIATION OF SASKATCHEWAN (Sask.)

CORAM:               L’Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Iacobucci 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

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Statutes - Interpretation - Freedom of expression - Right to vote - S. 322.1 of Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2 banning broadcast, publication or dissemination of results of public opinion polls for several days immediately prior to holding of federal election - Did the Ontario Court of Appeal err in holding that an absolute ban on a form of political speech for the final three days before a Federal election is consistent with the right to an informed vote under section 3  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ? - Did the Ontario Court of Appeal err in holding that section 322.1 of the Canada Elections Act constitutes a reasonable limit of both section 2(b)  and section 3  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

APRIL 17, 1997 / LE 17 AVRIL 1997

25762MAURO TRINCHINI  v.  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:              The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

                The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

                La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Change of venue - Jurisdiction - Whether the trial judge had jurisdiction to change the venue of the Applicant’s trial without an application by the parties - Whether the trial judge did in fact order a change of venue since the trial was to be held in the same judicial region in which the Applicant was indicted - Whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an interlocutory order in a criminal proceeding where the Applicant is the accused

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

November 22, 1996

Ontario Court ( General Division) (Haines J.)

Order changing the venue of the trial

January 21, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

25692GERALD E. LITOWITZ, HEADWAY PROPERTY INVESTMENT 78-I  and  HEADWAY PROPERTY INVESTMENT 78-I INC.  v.  ROYAL TRUST CORPORATION OF CANADA, TRUSTEE FOR THE STANDARD LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY  and  THE STANDARD LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY (Ont.)

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

Property law - Mortgages - Prepayment - Statutory right to prepay where mortgage for more than five years pursuant to the Interest Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. I-15, s.10(1)  and Mortgages Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M.40, s.18(1) - Statutory right to prepay not available to corporations, Interest Act , s. 10(2)  and  Mortgages Act, s. 18(2) - Did the Court of Appeal err in interpreting the statutory prepayment provisions - If the corporate mortgagor is a nominee or trustee for a non-corporate beneficial owner, is the identity of the beneficial owner, rather than the identity of the corporate mortgagor, determinative of the applicability of the exemption clause in subsection (2) - Is the exemption clause applicable if the party seeking to prepay a corporate mortgage pursuant to s-s. (1) is an individual “liable to pay or entitled to redeem” the mortgage.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

October 31, 1996

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Robins, Finlayson, Weiler JJ.A.)

Appeal allowed

December, 17, 1996

Supreme Court of Canada

Mr. Justice Iacobucci

Motion to extend time granted

January 30, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

25714JOEL VALE AND H.L.V. TRADING LIMITED  v.  SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA  and  JOEL VALE AND J.V. TRADING LIMITED  v.  SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA  and  JOEL VALE AND H.L.V. TRADING LIMITED  v.  SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA (Ont.)

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

Property law - Mortgages - Prepayment - Statutory right to prepay where mortgage for more than five years pursuant to the Interest Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. I-15, s.10(1)  and Mortgages Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M.40, s.18(1) - Statutory right to prepay not available to corporations, Interest Act , s. 10(2)  and  Mortgages Act, s. 18(2) - Did the Court of Appeal err in interpreting the statutory prepayment provisions - If the corporate mortgagor is a nominee or trustee for a non-corporate beneficial owner, is the identity of the beneficial owner, rather than the identity of the corporate mortgagor, determinative of the applicability of the exemption clause in subsection (2) - Is the exemption clause applicable if the party seeking to prepay a corporate mortgage pursuant to s-s. (1) is an individual “liable to pay or entitled to redeem” the mortgage.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

25715MOHAMED HADJI  c.  LA VILLE DE MONTRÉAL  et  LA COMMISSION DE LA FONCTION PUBLIQUE, SERVICE DES AFFAIRES CORPORATIVES DE LA VILLE DE MONTRÉAL, LA COMMISSION DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE ET ME PIERRE-OLIVIER BOUCHER (Qué.)

CORAM:               Le Juge en chef et les juges L’Heureux-Dubé et Gonthier

                La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

                The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Libertés publiques - Législation - Interprétation - Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., chap. C-12 - Discrimination fondée sur l’origine ethnique - Le demandeur a-t-il été victime de discrimination fondée sur l’origine ethnique dans le processus d’embauche de la Ville de Montréal? - Demande de réintégration rejetée par le Tribunal des droits de la personne - Requête pour permission d’appel rejetée par la Cour d’appel - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle commis une erreur en rejetant la requête pour permission d’appel du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

25643LE JOURNAL DE MONTRÉAL, DIVISION DE GROUPE QUÉBÉCOR INC.  c.  ME FRANÇOIS HAMELIN  et  SYNDICAT DES COMMUNICATIONS GRAPHIQUES, LOCAL 41M (Qué.)

CORAM:               Le Juge en chef et les juges L’Heureux-Dubé et Gonthier

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

                The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Relations de travail - Convention collective - Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Validité de l’entente annexée à la convention collective eu égard à la clause sur la sécurité d’emploi que l’employeur soutient être contraire à l’article 65 du Code du travail, L.R.Q., chap. C-27, parce que sa durée est supérieure à trois ans - Échec des négociations en vue du renouvellement de la convention collective - Exercice par l’employeur de son droit au lock-out - Griefs visant à obliger l’employeur à déférer le différend à l’arbitrage - Griefs accueillis en partie - Requête de la demanderesse en révision judiciaire rejetée en Cour supérieure - Appel rejeté - L’arbitre intimé a-t-il excédé sa compétence en concluant à la validité des dispositions de l’entente et en ordonnant à la demanderesse de se conformer à celles-ci?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 11 février 1994

Tribunal d’arbitrage (Hamelin, arbitre)

Griefs accueillis en partie; Validité de l’entente sur la sécurité d’emploi reconnue

Le 24 mars 1994

Cour supérieure du Québec (Reeves, J.C.S.)

Requête en révision judiciaire rejetée

Le 16 septembre 1996

Cour d’appel du Québec (Vallerand, Rothman et Nuss JJ.C.A.)

Appel rejeté

Le 15 novembre 1996

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée

25764BERNARD ST-AUBIN  c.  LE CURATEUR PUBLIC DU QUÉBEC  et  ROSAIRE THÉORET  et  LE CLUB JURIDIQUE (Qué.)

CORAM:               Le Juge en chef et les juges L’Heureux-Dubé et Sopinka

                La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

                The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédures - Procédure civile - Appel - Requête de l’intimé pour être autorisé à vendre l’immeuble du demandeur accueillie -  Requête du demandeur pour permission d’appel rejetée - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle commis une erreur en rejetant la requête pour permission d’appel du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 16 septembre 1996

Cour supérieure du Québec (Flynn J.C.S.)

Requête de l’intimé pour être autorisé à vendre l’immeuble du demandeur accueillie

Le 18 novembre 1996

Cour d’appel du Québec (Deschamps J.C.A.)

Requête du demandeur pour permission d’appel rejetée

Le 15 janvier 1997

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée

25597RODRIGUE GIRARD  c.  MARIUS MOISAN  et  OFFICIER DE LA PUBLICITÉ DES DROITS DE LA CIRCONSCRIPTION FONCIÈRE DE PORTNEUF (Qué.)

CORAM:               Le Juge en chef et les juges L’Heureux-Dubé et Gonthier

                La demande de réexamen est rejetée.

                The application for reconsideration is dismissed.

26.3.1997

Before / Devant: LE JUGE McLACHLIN

Requête pour déposer d'autres éléments de preuve

Ville de Longueuil

   c. (24990)

Michèle Godbout (Qué.)

Motion to adduce further evidence

REJETÉE / DISMISSED 

27.3.1997

Before / Devant: CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER

Motion to state a constitutional question

Thomson Newspapers Co. Ltd. et al.

   v. (25593)

The Attorney General of Canada (Ont.)

Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

(a)Does s. 322.1 of the Canada Elections Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-2, as amended, infringe s. 2(b) and/or s. 3  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

a)L’article 322.1 de la Loi électorale du Canada, L.R.C. (1985), ch. E-2 et ses modifications, contrevient-il à l’al. 2 b )  ou à l’art. 3  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés , ou aux deux à la fois?

(b)If s. 322.1 of the Canada Elections Act infringes s. 2(b) and/or s. 3  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , is s. 322.1 a reasonable limit prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society for the purposes of s. 1  of the  Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

b)Si l’article 322.1 de la Loi électorale du Canada contrevient à l’al. 2 b )  ou à l’art. 3  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés , ou aux deux à la fois, constitue-t-il une limite raisonnable prescrite par une règle de droit, dont la justification peut se démontrer dans le cadre d’une société libre et démocratique, aux fins de l’article premier de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés ?

27.3.1997

Before / Devant: CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER

Motion for additional time to present oral argument

Husky Oil Operations Ltd.

   v. (24855)

Saint John Shipbuilding Ltd. et al. (Nfld.)

Requête en prorogation du temps accordé pour la plaidoirie

With the consent of the parties.

DISMISSED / REJETÉE 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1) The time for oral argument at the hearing of the appeal shall be allocated as follows:

                Husky Oil Operations Ltd.                                  1 hour

                Bow Valley Industries Ltd.                 1 hour

                Bow Valley Husky (Bernuda) Ltd.                     1 hour

                Saint John Shipbuilding Ltd.                              1 hour, 30 min.

                Raychem Corp. & Raychem Canada Ltd.         1 hour, 30 min.

2) The appeal shall be heard on Thursday, June 19, 1997, commencing at 9:15 a.m.

27.3.1997

Before / Devant:   CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER

Hearing of miscellaneous motions on appeal

Thomson Newspapers Co. Ltd. et al.

   v. (25593)

The Attorney General of Canada (Ont.)

Audience sur autres requêtes en appel

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

The notice of motion to abridge time and expedite the hearing raises what I see as an insurmountable problem.  While I am quite ready, insofar as the parties themselves are concerned, to agree to set this appeal down for hearing on May 28, 1997, and while I am also ready to advise the Attorneys General who might wish to intervene under Rule 32 that the time granted for service of their factums is reduced, I fail to see how I can abridge the time granted under Rule 18(2) to potential interveners to come to a decision to intervene or not.  These potential interveners, who are unknown to me, now have until May 25, 1997 to do so which, in turn, is only three days before the date requested for the hearing of the appeal.

                I am not ready to deny potential litigants the right to have their day in Court in this important matter, absent hearing from them.  Of course, while this Court has always been extremely flexible in order to accommodate litigants in urgent circumstances, and then again in matters of extreme importance such as life or death, I, as Chief Justice, am unwilling to shut the doors of our Court to anyone who has the right to apply for and obtain intervener status.

                While all of this is based on speculation as to when elections will be held, this Court has always reserved its precious right to deliberate and hand down judgment when ready, within a reasonable time of course.  This Court cannot undertake to hand down judgment at a time prior to the elections which would be dispositive in one way or another of the issue.

                The motion is denied.

1.4.1997

Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to file the respondent’s factum

Belmoaris Gilberto Coreas

   v. (25503)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour déposer le mémoire de l’intimée

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to March 27, 1997.

1.4.1997

Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to file the case on appeal and the appellant’s factum

Nancy Law

   v. (25374)

The Minister of Human Resources Development (B.C.)

Requête en prorogation de délai imparti pour déposer le dossier d’appel et le mémoire de l’appelante

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE     Time extended to May 15, 1997 to file the case on appeal; Time extended to June 15, 1997 to file the appellant’s factum.

1.4.1997

Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Hearing of miscellaneous motions on appeal

Nancy Law

   v. (25374)

The Minister of Human Resources Development (B.C.)

Audience sur autres requêtes en appel

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

The motion excusing the appellant from complying with certain aspects of the Rules relating to the content of the case on appeal is granted and the number of copies of the case on appeal is reduced from 24 copies to 12 copies.

2.4.1997

Before / Devant:   IACOBUCCI J.

Motion to extend the time in which to file a notice of appeal

Chieu Ly

   v. (25746)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour déposer l’avis d’appel

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to January 17, 1997.

2.4.1997

Before / Devant: IACOBUCCI J.

Motion to extend the time in which to apply for leave to appeal

James Ralph MacInnis

   v. (25877)

Attorney General of Canada et al. (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai pour obtenir l'autorisation d'appel

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to April 30, 1997.

2.4.1997

Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Motion for an order allowing the pages of a factum to be printed on the right side

Robin Eldridge et al.

   v. (24896)

Attorney General of British Columbia et al. (B.C.)

Requête en autorisation d'imprimer du côté droit les pages d'un mémoire

With the consent of the parties.