Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

December 11, 1998  1931 - 1969                                                      le 11 décembre 1998

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Frederick George Newman

Alan D. Gold

Gold & Fuerst

v. (26951)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

W.F. Ehrcke

Min. of the A.G.

FILING DATE 9.11.1998

Jacques Chabot et al.

Monique D’Amours

Berger, Bourgeois, Langelier & Tremblay

c. (26973)

Marcel Gauthier (Qué.)

Marcel Gauthier

DATE DE PRODUCTION 18.11.1998

John Folkes

John Folkes

v. (26974)

Greensleeves Publishing Limited et al. (Ont.)

Steven Tenai

Tory, Tory, DesLauriers & Binnington

FILING DATE 12.11.1998

Clearview Dairy Farm (1989) Inc. et al.

Christopher Harvey, Q.C.

Russell & DuMoulin

v. (26975)

British Columbia Milk Marketing Board et al. (B.C.)

Robert P. Hrabinsky

MacAulay, McColl

FILING DATE 9.11.1998

Kuldip Singh Samra

James Lockyer

Pinkofsky, Lockyer

v. (26976)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Michael Bernstein

Min. of the A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 30.11.1998

Lloyd’s of London, also known as Non-Marine Underwriters, Members of Lloyd’s of London, England

Edwin G. Ehrhardt

Bingham Blair MacAulay Ehrhardt Teed

v. (26977)

Kimball Edward Norris et al. (N.B.)

James Mockler

Mockler Peters Oley Rouse & Williams

FILING DATE 16.11.1998

Sack Lee

R.A. (Sandy) Ross

Myers, Johnson, Ross & Foster

v. (26978)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

Scott Bell

A.G. of B.C.

FILING DATE 16.11.1998

Kenneth James Dickhoff

Michael D. Tochor

Merchant Law Group

v. (26878)

Her Majesty the Queen (Sask.)

D. Murray Brown, Q.C.

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 23.11.1998

Mr. Justice Thomas A. Beckett

W. Zimmerman

Zimmerman & Associates

v. (26958)

The Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

Peter A. Vita, Q.C.

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 16.11.1998

Apotex Inc.

H.B. Radomski

Goodman Phillips & Vineberg

v. (26979)

Bayer Aktiengesellschaft et al. (Ont.)

Neil Belmore

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

FILING DATE 24.11.1998

DECEMBER 7, 1998 / LE 7 DÉCEMBRE 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

Neil Grandmaison, Christina Khoury, Victor Camara

v. (26898)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Intercepted private communications - Wiretaps - Judicial review - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the test for the issuance of an authorization to intercept private communications is simply a showing that intercepts will be the most efficacious manner of investigation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge ought not to have relied on an adverse finding of credibility to hold that the affidavit could not be relied upon and an authorization could not have been granted in circumstances of an unreliable affiant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Crown appeal was an appeal on a question of law.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Angela Araujo and Spencer Leslie

v. (26904)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Intercepted private communications - Wiretaps - Judicial review - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the existence of reasonable and probable grounds necessary for granting a wiretap authorization was not affected by a finding that the affiant had knowingly misled the Court on a matter relating to the accuracy of the matters set out in the wiretap affidavit - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge ought not to have considered a false explanation offered by the affiant to explain non-disclosure of errors in an affidavit.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Robert Jenkins, Tiffany Muriel Leslie

v. (26899)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

 Criminal law - Intercepted private communications - Wiretaps - Judicial review - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the test for the issuance of an authorization to intercept private communications is simply a showing that intercepts will be the most efficacious manner of investigation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge could not rely on an adverse finding of credibility to hold that the affidavit could not be relied upon and an authorization could not have been granted in circumstances of an unreliable affiant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Crown appeal was an appeal on a question of law.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Jolene Irons

v. (26968)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Intercepted private communications - Wiretaps - Judicial review - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the test for the issuance of an authorization to intercept private communications is simply a showing that intercepts will be the most efficacious manner of investigation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge could not rely on an adverse finding of credibility to hold that the affidavit could not be relied upon and an authorization could not have been granted in circumstances of an unreliable affiant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Crown appeal was an appeal on a question of law.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Kevin Lathangue

v. (26943)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

 Criminal law - Intercepted private communications - Wiretaps - Judicial review - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the test for the issuance of an authorization to intercept private communications is simply a showing that intercepts will be the most efficacious manner of investigation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge could not rely on an adverse finding of credibility to hold that the affidavit could not be relied upon and an authorization could not have been granted in circumstances of an unreliable affiant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Crown appeal was an appeal on a question of law.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                     Provincial Court Judges’ Association of British Columbia

                                                                                                v. (26812)

                                                                 Attorney General of British Columbia (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional law - Statutes - Interpretation - Administrative law - Judicial review - Remedies - Labour law - Compensation - Provincial Court Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, s. 7.1, as am. S.B.C. 1994, c. 26 - Judicial Compensation Committee appointed pursuant to s. 7.1 of the Provincial Court Act made recommendations to improve salaries and benefits of provincial court judges - Recommendations were rejected by Legislative Assembly of British Columbia on basis that they were “unfair and unreasonable” within the meaning of s. 7.1(9)(a) - Applicant’s petition for judicial review was dismissed - Appeal was allowed on basis that Legislative Assembly had failed to take a rational approach to the consideration of the recommendations - Matter was referred back to the Legislative Assembly for reconsideration - Legislative Assembly reconsidered matter and confirmed original decision - Whether Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to remit matter to Legislative Assembly - Whether appropriate remedy instead was to declare the recommendations of the Judicial Compensation Committee to have the force of law pursuant to s. 7.1(10) - Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding the resolution of the Legislative Assembly to be unreasonable - Whether Court of Appeal erred in its application of the “simple rationality” test as defined by this Honourable Court in Reference re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier and Bastarache JJ. /

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                     Loucas Andritsopoulos

                                                                                                v. (26866)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes- Statutory Instruments - Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Veteran Appeals Board - Former resistance fighter denied a war veterans allowance because of lack of evidence of war time service - Resistance fighter appealed to the War Veterans Appeal Board - War Veterans Appeal Board received confirmation of his war time service but did not hear the appeal before Parliament amended The War Veterans Allowance Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. W-3  by passing The War Veterans Allowance Act , S.C. 1992, c.24 - Amendments removed resistance fighters from the category of persons eligible for a war veterans allowance - War Veterans Appeal Board applied unamended version of the Act and declared resistance fighter had met service requirements for eligibility for an allowance - Whether unamended or amended version of War Veterans Allowance Act  should have ben applied - Whether War Veterans Appeal Board should have declared eligibility for a war veterans allowance.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                                     F.M.

                                                                                                c. (26813)

                                                                                               P.B. (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Une Cour d’appel peut-elle, sans enfreindre le droit d’une partie à une audition de sa cause, principe fondamental de justice naturelle garanti par l’art. 23 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., ch. C-12, rejeter sommairement un appel en vertu de l’art. 501(5) du Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q., ch. C-25, alors que ce recours n’est ni abusif ni dilatoire mais est au contraire bien fondé à la seule vue des documents? - Dans la négative, la partie lésée est-elle fondée, aux termes de l’art. 49 de la Charte, d’obtenir de la Cour suprême la cessation de cette atteinte illicite que seule une audition de sa cause pourra lui procurer?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Evagelos Agioritis, also known as Von Agioritis

v. (26873)

Sophia Maroudis, formerly known as Sophia Agioritis (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law ‑ Division of property ‑ Spouse earning interest on loans commencing after date of application for division of property - Whether interest earned was marital property subject to division - Whether awarding a one-half share of earned interest from the commencement of loan until date of payment contravened the provisions governing interest rates on judgment debts in the Interest Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-18.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 16, 1996

Court of Queen’s Bench of Saskatchewan

(Maurice J.)

Award of $301,869.47 to Respondent

July 7, 1998

Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

(Vancise, Lane and Jackson JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed, cross-application to vary granted

September 25, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                                                         Alex Couture Inc.

                                                                                                c. (26678)

                                                                     Municipalité de la ville de Charny (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit municipal - Évaluation foncière - Droit administratif - Compétence - Contrôle judiciaire - Législation - Interprétation de l’art. 65.(1) de la Loi sur fiscalité municipale, L.R.Q., chap. F-2.1 (ci-après la “L.F.M.”) - Usine d’équarrissage - Système d’épuration de l’air par biofiltration - L’appareil est-il utilisé à des fins de production industrielle? - Application de l’arrêt Ciment Québec Inc. c. Corporation municipale de Saint-Basile Village Sud, [1993] 2 R.C.S. 823 - Compétence spécialisée du Bureau de révision de l’évaluation foncière (le “B.R.E.F.”) - Norme de contrôle applicable - Application de l’arrêt Canada (Directeur des enquêtes et recherches) c. Southam Inc. [1997] 1 R.C.S. 748.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Khalid Somra, Ruth Bowlby, Executrix of the Estate of Arthur T. Bowlby,

Heather Hutt, Carleton Travel Services Ltd. and Mary Sheffield

                                                                                                v. (26667)

432080 Ontario Limited, 157349 Canada Limited, Ottawa Algonquin Travel Corporation,

James Lough, Claire Lough and Stephen Lough (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Sale - Valuation of a business for sale - In an agreement providing for calculation by an accountant jointly chosen, what meaning do the words “final and conclusive” have - Whether an accountant operating under the agreement should have been given the same respect and weight as an arbitrator with a privative clause - Whether an agreement requiring an accountant to follow generally accepted accounting principles on a consistent basis with other years must follow statements prepared contrary to generally accepted accounting principles.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                   Patricia Joan Marie Hill

                                                                                                v. (26724)

                                                                  Florence McMillan and Harrison Marion as

Administrators of the Estate of Hector Marion (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  -  Property law - Estates - Statutes - Interpretation - Applicant claiming to be child of male intestate and claiming to be entitled to his estate - No presumption of paternity applicable - Subsection 20(6) of The Family Maintenance Act, R.S.M. 1980, c. F20  creating a bar to declaration of paternity after the death of the alleged father - Whether bar is applicable to applications under The Intestate Succession Act, S.M. 1989-90, c. 43 - Whether statutory bar  violates section 15  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:    Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

                                                                                           Naresh Kaushal

                                                                                                v. (26622)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Whether trial judge was required to give a limiting instruction to the jury that although they had heard evidence of numerous assaults spanning an eighteen month period, the indictment alleged only a single assault and consequently, they were required to be unanimous in their verdict as to which of the numerous assaults was proven beyond reasonable doubt - Whether “single transaction” rule obviates the need for any limiting instruction - Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the evidence of numerous assaults which occurred over an eighteen month period constituted a “single transaction” - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that Crown was entitled to adduce evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statements and prior consistent statements in examination in chief for the purpose of bolstering the credibility of the witness and undermining anticipated cross-examination of defence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Trengrove Developments Inc. (94-2663(GST)G), Astra-Globe Building Group Inc. (94-2633(GST)G), Astra-Mar Investments Inc. (94-2634(GST)G), Atteridge Construction Ltd. (94-2635(GST)G), Bayfield Building Corporation (94-2637(GST)G), Blairwood Valley Homes Inc. (94-2638(GST)G), Bradwick Developments Ltd. (94-2639(GST)G), Brydonview Estates Inc. (94-2640(GST)G), Clairidge Building Corporation (94-2641(GST)G), Coral Acres Estates Inc. (94-2642(GST)G), Dundene Forest Developments Inc. (94-2643(GST)G), Eatonwood Estates Inc. (94-2644(GST)G), Eldercrest Estates Inc. (94-2645(GST)G), Erin Dancer Holding Corp. (94-2646(GST)G), Fieldport Estates Inc. (94-2647(GST)G), Floral Shirt Investments Corporation (94-2648(GST)G), Home-Oak Investments Inc. (94-2649(GST)G), Home Sport Inc. (94-2650(GST)G), Kingsglen Developments Inc. (94-2651(GST)G), Marlin-Watson Home Corp. (94-2652(GST)G), Peakmount Developments Ltd. (94-2659(GST)G), Princestar Homes Ltd. (94-2660(GST)G), Ravencliff Estates Inc. (94-2661(GST)G), Shurphil Holdings Corp. (94-2662(GST)G), Simongate Estates Inc. (94-2667(GST)G), Spictan Holdings Inc. (94-2666(GST)G), Swan Valley Developments Inc. (94-2665(GST)G), Twelve-Jan Investments Inc. (94-2670(GST)G), Two Step Holdings Inc. (94-2669(GST)G), and Unidenton Holding Corp. (94-2668(GST)G)

                                                                                                v. (26793)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the value of the Goods and Services Tax Rebate or the Federal Sales Tax New Housing Rebate that is assigned by the purchaser of a newly constructed home to the builder constitutes part of the builder’s total consideration for the sale of the home and is subject to GST - Whether the Tax Court of Canada erred in law by applying a doctrine of “more rigorous scrutiny of taxpayer activities” on the basis of a purposive analysis of the relevant fiscal legislation - Sections 121 , 154  and 254  of the Excise Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. E-15 , Part IX, as amended.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Edward Charles Richardson a.k.a. Edward Chum Richardson

v. (26956)

Judith Richardson a.k.a. Judith Velazquez de Richardson (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Divorce - Division of property - Maintenance - Family assets - Distribution of family assets - Family Relations Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, Chapter 128, Part V - Divorce Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 - Whether the lower courts disposed of the case properly?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                        Dr. Keith Mondesir

                                                                                                v. (26816)

                                                                 Manitoba Association of Optometrists (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Investigation into professional misconduct of an optometrist - Reasonable apprehension of bias concerning member of the complaints committee - Whether the existence of a reasonable apprehension of bias at the investigative stage of the administrative process warrants the granting of a prohibition order preventing the complaint from proceeding to a second-stage discipline committee for hearing.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Isabelle Rijntjes

v. (26906)

Workers' Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Workers’ Compensation - Administrative law - Judicial review - Standard of review - Jurisdiction - Statutes - Interpretation - Workers’ Compensation Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 508 (the former Act) - Workers’ Compensation Act, R.S.N.S. 1994-95, c. 10 (the current Act) - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of s. 24 of the former Act - Whether the Court of Appeal erred by failing to find that s. 24 of the former Act limits the jurisdiction of the WCAT - Whether the Court of Appeal erred regarding the standard of review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                           John R. McColl

                                                                                                v. (26845)

                                                            The Corporation of the Town of Gravenhurst (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Judicial review - Applicant dismissed as chief administrative officer and clerk of Respondent town after a hearing - Replacement hired - Hearing declared invalid - Matter remitted to Respondent town for new hearing - New hearing held - Whether a statutory body required to hold a hearing prior to the dismissal of a public officer can lawfully dismiss the individual, hire a replacement, and then hold a hearing to consider whether the individual ought to be re-hired - Whether the minimal standard for bias set out in Old St. Boniface Residents Association Inc. v. Winnipeg (City), [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1170 and Save Richmond Farmland Society v. Richmond (Township), [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1213 is the wrong standard to apply in that it cannot be reconciled with the “high standard of justice” demanded by this Court when the right to continue one’s professional employment is at stake, as set out in Kane v. Board of Governors of the University of British Columbia, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1105 and Knight v. Indian Head School Division No._19, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 653.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

DECEMBER 10, 1998 / LE 10 DÉCEMBRE 1998

26728                    MARK BODENSTEIN - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin 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 - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in applying section 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code of Canada  circumstances of this case - Whether Court of Appeal effectively denied the applicant the opportunity of making full answer and defence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26780                    LADNER DOWNS AND ARTHUR EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES LTD. - v. - DOUGLAS SHORE (B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin 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

Labour law - Master and Servant - Dismissal - Appropriate period of notice of termination of employment - Contract of Employment - Contractual terms - Enforceability of contractual terms - Term in employment contract providing for 30 days notice - Statutory notice provisions - Employment Standards Act, S.B.C. 1980, c. 10, s. 2 - Common law presumption of reasonable notice - Whether the lower courts disposed of the case properly - Whether the contractual term in question is enforceable.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26798                    IMTIAZ HUSAIN v. CANADIAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL LTD.  (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

CORAM:           L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed without costs.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée sans frais.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Judicial review - Labour law - Statutes - Interpretation - Canada Labour Code , R.S.C. 1985, c.L-2  - Unjust dismissal - s. 242(3.1) (limitation on complaints) - Whether an adjudicator appointed under Part III of the Canada Labour Code  had jurisdiction to hear a complaint of unjust dismissal - Whether such a hearing was barred by s. 242(3.1) of the Code which bars a complaint where the complainant “has been laid off because of lack of work or because of the discontinuance of a function” - An adjudicator held that the provision did not apply and that the Applicant had been unjustly dismissed - This was reversed by the Federal Court of Appeal - Whether Federal Court of Appeal erred in quashing the adjudicator’s award - Whether Federal Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s. 242(3.1)(a) - Whether Federal Court of Appeal misapplied Flieger v. New Brunswick, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 651 - Whether Federal Court of Appeal misconstrued its role by substituting its opinion for that of the adjudicator on a finding of fact relating to the adjudicator’s jurisdiction - Whether decision of Federal Court of Appeal is inconsistent with the pronouncements of this Honourable Court on the role of a court on judicial review of a labour tribunal.                         

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26829               G.G. c. J.L.  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit de la famille - Divorce - Garde - Accès - Changement du lieu de résidence - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en statuant que l’imposition de restrictions au “droit” du parent gardien de choisir le lieu de résidence est l’exception? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en refusant de considérer la conduite de l’intimée? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en confirmant la décision du juge Audet, laquelle fut prise sans nouvelle expertise et sans analyse complète de tous les éléments permettant de déterminer l’intérêt des enfants? - Gordon c. Goertz, [1996] 2 R.C.S. 27.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

26647                    JEFFREY FINK, INTERNATIONAL FREEHOLD FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., GENERAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Solicitor-client privilege - Whether the application judge erred in finding that the documents in question were not born within the solicitor-client relationship and were not therefore protected from disclosure - Whether the application judge erred in finding that documents that were created based on communications between the Applicant and his counsel were not privileged - Whether the application judge erred in not finding that when a client instructs his counsel to complete a specific transaction and prepare documents for this purpose, the documents, like the instructions are privileged - Whether the application judge erred in finding that there was an insufficient evidentiary basis to establish the Applicant’s solicitor-client privilege claim.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 27, 1998

Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (German J.)

Application to prevent disclosure of documents to Respondent dismissed

June 26, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

26737                    IRVING OIL LIMITED - v. - ANGELA MOQUIN, CRYSTAL PRINCE, LINDA BENNETT, DAVID J. JEWER, GUY L. LEMOINE, KELLY CAMPBELL, NICKINA T. GARDINER, DANIEL P. SCHRIVER, DALE A. SCHRIVER AND THE DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS (N.B.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Statutes - Interpretation - Creditor and landlord realizes upon security, seizes assets and inventory of debtor, and carries on debtor’s business - Creditor and landlord ordered to pay vacation pay and wages as successor employer - Labour and Employment Board decides that the realization of security constituted a disposition of the debtor’s business and creditor became a successor employer under the Employment Standards Act, S.N.B. 1982, c. E-7.2 - Whether creditor became a successor employer - Patent reasonableness of Board’s decision.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26740                    CANADA POST CORPORATION - v. - JAMES W. SMITH and WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to James W. Smith.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens à James W. Smith.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Judicial review - Standard of review - Labour law - Workers’ Compensation - Statutes - Interpretation - Government Employees Compensation Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. G-5  - Workers’ Compensation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. W. 11 - Definition of “compensation” - Who has jurisdiction for determining what injured federal workers are entitled to in Ontario - Obligation to re-employ injured workers - Whether “compensation” includes the obligation to re-employ - Whether a Canada Post employee, injured at the workplace, is entitled to rely on the re-employment rights found in the Workers’ Compensation Act - Whether this decision conflicts with other appellate authorities - Whether the lower courts disposed of the case properly.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26702                    GIOVANNI DIDOMIZIO - v. - FRANK PORTO and MIRIAM PORTO (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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 - Remedies - Residential real estate transaction - Extension Agreement - Deposit - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial judge, in his treatment of the $160,000 deposit, granted relief from forfeiture - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in disallowing the Applicant’s claim for damages for expenses incurred before August 1992 - Whether the $160,000 deposit should have been returned to the purchaser, subject to the vendor’s claim for damages.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26692                    MICHAEL C. JAMES - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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 - Civil procedure - Limitation of Actions -Taxation - Assessment - Deemed Notice - Whether mailing Notices of Confirmation of tax reassessments to taxpayers last known address constitutes notice of reassessment for purpose of commencing a one-year limitation period on appeals from reassessments.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

January 13, 1995

Tax Court of Canada (Brulé J.)

Extension of time to file appeal denied

December 21, 1995

Tax Court of Canada (Brulé J.)

Motions to amend judgment and to extend time to file Notice of Appeal in Federal Court of Appeal dismissed

May 27, 1997

Federal Court of Appeal

(Marceau, Linden, Robertson JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

June 16, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada (Major J.)

Extension of time to file application for leave to appeal granted

August 10, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

26710                    FREDA EVELYN LANGENHAHN and ROBERT LESLIE LANGENHAHN - v. - RICHARD M. CZYZ and RICHARD M. CZYZ PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION (Alta.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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

Torts - Actions - Prescription - Whether general rule of discoverability applies to s.55 of the Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.A. 1980 c.L-15 respecting professional negligence and malpractice actions against dentists, physicians, chiropractors, podiatrists and optometrists - Whether incorporating the common law  and equitable  principle of discoverability into s.55 of the Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.A. 1980 c.L-15 is within the jurisdiction of the Courts.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26304                    ROBERT PROUDFOOT HESS, TRIUMPH CREDIT CORPORATION LIMITED, CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE, THE T. EATON COMPANY LTD., BANK OF MONTREAL, GOODMAN AND CARR, THE ETOBICOKE WATERFRONT PARTNERSHIP, CATHERINE J. LUKES, IN TRUST, and THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY - v. - 1233375 ONTARIO INC. (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal as well as all ancillary motions are dismissed with costs.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel et toutes requêtes accessoires sont rejetées avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Mortgages - Interest - Whether the mortgage, as renewed from time to time, was contrary to section 6 of the Interest Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-18  - Whether the calculation of interest owing under the mortgage was wrong.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26668                    R. MARK RECALMA, LAURA D. RECALMA and ARNOLD P. RECALMA - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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

Indians -Taxation - Exemption - Investment income - Income received by aboriginals living on reserve  through bank located on reserve from monies invested off reserve - Whether Applicants’ investment income is “situated on a reserve” within the meaning of ss. 87(1) (b) of  the Indian Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. I-5  - Whether the purpose of s. 87 is to prevent the erosion of property held by Indians qua Indians so as to protect their traditional Native way of life - Whether test for determining whether intangible personal property is “situated on a reserve” under s. 87(1)(b)  is so uncertain as to require re-examination.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26704                    GREAT TEMPO S.A. v. JIAN SHENG CO. LTD. and SINOTRANS CANADA INC. (F.C.A.) (B.C.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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

Maritime law - Shipping - Procedural law - Civil procedure - Pre-trial procedure - Stay of proceedings - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in dismissing a motion for a stay - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Applicant failed to establish that its principal place of business was in Hong Kong, thus justifying a stay of proceedings in Canadian courts pursuant to a jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal imposed an unreasonable burden of proof on the Applicant - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal wrongly interfered in the exercise of discretion by the motions judge who had granted a stay.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26722                    HOWARD WHITE, THERESA WHITE - v. - RAFFAELE CUGLIARI (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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

Statutes - Interpretation - Torts - Damages - Whether Canada Pension Plan disability benefits, which are obtained pursuant to a mandatory public statutory program, are deductible from an award of damages either at common law or pursuant to s. 267(1)(c) of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.  I. 8 - Whether Canada Pension Plan disability benefits were indemnity payments - Where s.  267 displaced the common law principles relating to the deductibility of benefits from damages awards in the context of motor vehicle accidents - Cunningham v. Wheeler, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 359.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26741                    TAM THANH CHU - v. - MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION (F.C.A.) (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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 - Convention refugee - Documentary evidence - Administrative law - Judicial Review - Danger to the public determination pursuant to s. 70(5) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1976-77, c. 52 - What is the appropriate standard of review - Whether the lower court erred by deciding that certain information on country conditions considered by the Minister’s delegate in forming the opinion that the Applicant was a danger to the public was not extrinsic evidence requiring disclosure to the Applicant - Whether the lower court erred by making a presumption that documentary evidence was available to the Applicant.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26749                    JON OPREA and ELENA OPREA - v. - THE ROYAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie 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 - Claim for property losses following incendiary fire - Allegation of arson - Onus of proving arson - Whether evidence of motive and opportunity were proven and substantiated finding of arson.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26752                    ERNEST A.J. HAWRISH - v. - THE LAW SOCIETY OF SASKATCHEWAN, THE BENCHERS, THE COMMITTEES AND THE OFFICERS OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF SASKATCHEWAN (Sask.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Statutes - Interpretation - Disciplinary proceedings - Whether time requirements imposed by statute on tribunals of limited authority are to be strictly interpreted - Whether non-observance of time requirements by tribunal results in failure of jurisdiction - Whether a tribunal is required to stay its own proceedings when an application is made to the Supreme Court of Canada challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

November 10, 1997

Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench

(Hrabinsky J.)

Order prohibiting the Respondents from filing any further proceedings or actions alleging that Applicant is guilty of conduct unbecoming a barrister and solicitor

May 19, 1998

Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

(Cameron, Sherstobitoff and Lane JJ.A.)

Appeal allowed

July 17, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

26763                    PETER D. SHANOHA - v. - MOTORWAYS (1980) LTD. (Man.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The motion 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

Procedural law - Civil procedure - Summary judgment - Labour law - Collective agreement -Whether summary judgment was appropriately granted in this case - Whether the courts have jurisdiction in this case - Whether the collective agreement addresses the issues raised in the Applicant’s statement of claim - Whether unionized workers can sue for wrongful dismissal if their collective agreement does not address the issue of termination.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26834                    THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE - v. - GLAXO WELLCOME PLC (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

CORAM:           Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Civil procedure - Evidence - Statutes - Interpretation - Does the equitable bill of discovery exist in Canada, particularly given that pre-trial discovery and discovery of non-parties are matters which in Canada have been dealt with by legislation and rules of civil procedure - Is the equitable bill of discovery available where the means for disclosure of information has been expressly provided by the statute, and particularly where decisions made pursuant to that legislation are open to review by a court - Is the equitable bill of discovery  available against a person who is not connected to or involved in the alleged misconduct - Does their administration of the Customs Act mean that the Minister of National Revenue and his officials are “connected to or involved in” the importation of allegedly infringing goods - Is the equitable bill of discovery available against the Crown, absent any statutory waiver of the Crown’s prerogative immunity from discovery other than as a party to an action.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

16.11.1998

Before / Devant:   BASTARACHE J.

Motion for an order:

1)         Allowing the applicants to obtain a new mortgage;

2)         Releasing a security deposit of $15,000 from the Ontario Court (General Division) to the Supreme Court of Canada

Fouzia Saeed Khan et al.

    v. (26839)

Farida Timakis (Ont.)

Requête sollicitant une ordonnance:

1)         autorisant les requérants à obtenir une nouvelle hypothèque;

2)         portant remise à la Cour suprême du Canada du cautionnement de 15 000 $ déposé à la Cour de l’Ontario (Division générale)

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Her Majesty the Queen

    v. (25858)

Edmon Kabbabe (Qué.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le mémoire de l’intimé

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to November 18, 1998.

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:    BASTARACHE J.

Motion for a stay of execution

Fouzia Saeed Khan et al.

     v. (26839)

Farida Timakis (Ont.)

Requête en vue de surseoir à l’exécution

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:   LE REGISTRAIRE

Requête en prorogation de délai pour signifier le mémoire de l’intimé

Sa Majesté la Reine

     c. (26226)

Benoit Grégoire (Qué.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Délai prorogé au 19 novembre 1998.

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the appellant’s record, factum and book of authorities

Her Majesty the Queen in right of Newfoundland et al.

     v. (26362)

Andrew Wells (Nfld.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le dossier, le mémoire et le cahier de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’appelante

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to October 26, 1998.

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:    GONTHIER J.

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

Shell Canada Ltd.

     v. (26596)

Her Majesty the Queen (Alta.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to November 17, 1998 nunc pro tunc.

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent’s response

Bot Construction Limited

     v. (26758)

Her Majesty the Queen in right of the province of Ontario et al. (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer la réponse de l’intimée

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to November 13, 1998.

26.11.1998

Before / Devant:    THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file  an intervener’s factum and book of authorities

BY/PAR:                A.G. of N.B.

IN/DANS:              United Foods and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1288P

    v. (26203)

Allsco Building Products Ltd. et al. (N.B.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le mémoire et le cahier de jurisprudence et de doctrine d’un intervenant

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to November 2, 1998 nunc pro tunc to serve and file the factum and to November 5, 1998 nunc pro tunc to serve and file the book of authorities.

27.11.1998

Before / Devant:   GONTHIER J.

Motion on appeal by the respondents for an order directing the interveners to file their factums by November 25, 1998

Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada et al.

     v. (26174)

Angelo Del Zotto (Ont.)

Requête en appel présentée par les intimés en vue d’obtenir une ordonnance enjoignant aux  intervenants de déposer leurs mémoires au plus tard  le 25 novembre 1998

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

The application is granted as follows:

It being acknowledged that the Attorney General for Ontario has filed its factum on November 6, 1998, the Attorney General of Québec is directed to serve and file its factum by December 2, 1998 and the Attorney General of Alberta is directed to serve and file its factum by December 8, 1998.

27.11.1998

Before / Devant: GONTHIER J.

Motion to adduce new evidence on behalf of the intervener

BY/PAR:                Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton

IN/DANS:              L.C. et al.

v. (26358)

Brian Joseph Mills (Alta.)

Requête tendant au dépôt d’une nouvelle preuve au nom de l’intervenant

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

On the application for fresh evidence by the intervener Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton for leave to introduce by way of fresh evidence the affidavits of Catherine Hedlin and Dr. Marjorie Nix Holmgren, I find that much of the evidence, notably that covered by the affidavit of Dr. Holmgren and Exhibit “B” to the affidavit of Catherine Hedlin are already in evidence, that certain material is not proper evidence or not required to be produced as evidence and I am not satisfied that the remaining material, with the possible exception of Exhibit “F”, is required to supplement the record.  In the absence of any objection, I am prepared to allow the motion in part with reference only to the production of a paper entitled “Health Aspects of Violence Against Women” by Dianne Kinnon and Louise Hanvey, identified as Exhibit “F” to the affidavit of Catherine Hedlin.

For the foregoing reasons, the application is granted in part and an order shall issue granting leave to introduce as fresh evidence the paper entitled “Health Aspects of Violence Against Women” by Dianne Kinnon and Louise Hanvey, and extending the time for the applicant intervener to file its factum until December 4, 1998.

30.11.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent’s factum and book of authorities

Vincent Godoy

     v. (26078)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le mémoire et le cahier de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intimé

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time to serve and file the respondent’s factum extended to September 30, 1998 and its book of authorities to November 24, 1998.

30.11.1998

Before / Devant:    LE REGISTRAIRE

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer la réponse de l’appelante à la demande d’autorisation d’appel incident de l’intimé

Sa Majesté la Reine

    c. (26646)

Daniel Jolivet (Qué.)

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the appellant’s response to the respondent’s motion for leave to cross-appeal

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Délai prorogé au 30 novembre 1998.

30.11.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent’s book of authorities

Jamie Tannis Gladue

     v. (26300)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le cahier de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intimée

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to November 12, 1998.

1.12.1998

Before / Devant:    LE JUGE BINNIE

Requête de la demanderesse pour obtenir une ordonnance l’autorisant à produire des documents additionnels

Alex Couture Inc.

     c. (26678)

Municipalité de la Ville de Charny (Qué.)

Motion for an order permitting the applicant to file additional material

RÉFÉRÉE au banc saisie de la demande d’autorisation d’appel / REFERRED to the bench seized of the application for leave to appeal.

1.12.1998

Before / Devant:   LE JUGE EN CHEF LAMER

Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

Richter & Associés Inc. et al.

     c. (26272)

Le sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec

   et entre

Tremblay & Compagnie Syndics et Gestionnaires Ltée

    c.

Le sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec et le Procureur général du Canada (Qué.)

Motion to state a constitutional question

Eugène Czolij et Me Patrice Benoit, pour les appelantes.

Me René Bourassa, pour l’intimé.

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

2.12.1998

Before / Devant:   LE REGISTRAIRE

Requête pour permission de déposer un mémoire d'appel de plus de 40 pages

Sa Majesté la Reine

     c. (26830)

J.-L. J. (Qué.)

Motion to file a factum on appeal over 40 pages

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   La requête de l’appelante pour obtenir une ordonnance l’autorisant à produire un mémoire plus de 40 pages, en l’espèce 53 pages est accordée.

2.12.1998

James Warren Wells

   v. (26642)

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

3.12.1998

Her Majesty the Queen

    v. (26705)

Glenn White (Nfld.)

4.12.1998

Nicodemo Sansalone

     v. (26708)

The Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (B.C.)

3.12.1998

CORAM:               Chief Justice Lamer and L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache and Binnie JJ.

Arthur Robert Winters

     v. (26180)

Legal Services Society et al. (Crim.)(B.C.)

John W. Conroy, Q.C. and Michael Jackson, for the appellant.

Douglas MacAdams and Mark Benton, for the respondent Legal Services Society.

Harvey Groberman and Neema Sharma, for the respondent Attorney General of British Columbia.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Criminal law - Prison disciplinary hearings - Legal Services Society Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 227 - Whether the Appellant is a defendant in criminal proceedings that could lead to his imprisonment and therefore eligible for legal services under the Legal Services Society Act - Whether the Appellant is a person who may be imprisoned or confined through civil proceedings and therefore eligible for legal services under the Legal Services Society Act.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Audiences disciplinaires en milieu carcéral - Legal Services Society Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, ch. 227 - En vertu de la Legal Services Society Act, l’appelant a-t-il droit à des services juridiques au motif qu’il fait l’objet d’une poursuite criminelle susceptible de le conduire à l’emprisonnement ? - En vertu de la Legal Services Society Act, l’appelant a-t-il droit à des services juridiques au motif qu’il est susceptible d’être emprisonné ou séquestré à la suite d’un procès civil?

3.12.1998

CORAM:               Chief Justice Lamer and L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache and Binnie JJ.

Robert Dennis Starr

     v. (26514)

Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(Man.)

G. Gregg Brodsky, Q.C., for the appellant.

Gregg Lawlor, for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Criminal law - Evidence - Whether the trial judge erred in failing to properly explain “reasonable doubt” - Whether the trial judge erred in allowing Jodie Giesbrecht to testify to out-of-court statements made by the deceased Bo Cook - Whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of an out-of-court identification of the Appellant.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Preuve - Le juge du procès a-t-il commis une erreur en n’expliquant pas comme il se doit le “doute raisonnable”? - Le juge du procès a-t-il commis une erreur en permettant à Jodie Giesbrecht de témoigner relativement à des déclarations extrajudiciaires faites par la victime Bo Cook? - Le juge du procès a-t-il commis une erreur en admettant une preuve d’identification extrajudiciaire de l’appelant?

4.12.1998

CORAM:               Le juge en chef  Lamer et les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache et Binnie

Sa Majesté la Reine

    c. (25858)

Edmon Kabbabe (Crim.)(Qué.)

Pierre Sauvé, pour l’appelante.

Frank Laveaux, pour l’intimé.

EN DÉLIBÉRÉ /  RESERVED

AVIS D’APPEL INCIDENT RETIRÉ / NOTICE OF CROSS APPEAL WITHDRAWN

Nature of the case:

Criminal law—Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms—Evidence—Pre-trial procedure—Right to silence—Whether the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the evidence derived from the compelled testimony of the wife of the accused is inadmissible in evidence at the trial of the accused—Whether Nuss J.A., one of the majority judges, erred in holding that s. 4  of the Canada Evidence Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-5 , applies to an inquiry held by the fire investigation commissioner by operation of s. 25 of the Fire Investigations Act, R.S.Q., c. E-8—Whether, when a fire investigation commissioner compels a person suspected of arson to testify, that person’s fundamental rights under s. 7 of the Charter, and specifically the right to silence as defined in R. v. Hébert, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151, are infringed.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Preuve - Procédure préalable au procès - Droit au silence - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en décidant, à la majorité, que la preuve dérivée du témoignage donné sous contrainte par l’épouse de l’accusé, n’est pas recevable en preuve au procès de cet accusé? - Le juge Nuss, de la majorité, a-t-il erré en droit en déterminant que les dispositions de l’art. 4  de la Loi sur la preuve au Canada , L.R.C. 1985 ch. C.5 , s’appliquent à une enquête tenue par le commissaire aux incendies et ce, par l’effet de l’art. 25 de la Loi concernant les enquêtes sur les incendies, S.R.Q. ch. E-8? - Le fait pour un commissaire aux incendies de contraindre à témoigner une personne soupçonnée d’incendie criminel contrevient-il aux droits fondamentaux de cette personne, tels que prévus à l’art. 7 de la Charte et spécialement à son droit au silence, tel que défini dans l’arrêt R. c. Hébert, [1990] 2 R.C.S. 151?

4.12.1998

CORAM:               L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, McLachlin, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache and Binnie JJ.

Her Majesty the Queen

     v. (26404)

Isaac Monney (Crim.)(Ont.)

James W. Leising and Thomas Beveridge, for the appellant.

Russell S. Silverstein and David M. Tanovich, for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Criminal law - Narcotics - Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Detention - Seizure - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the majority in the Court of Appeal erred in reaching a different conclusion than the trial judge as to whether the customs officers had reasonable and probable grounds to believe the Respondent had narcotics secreted within his person - Whether s. 98 of the Customs Act authorizes the detention and search of persons who have narcotics secreted within their body - What constitutes a “reasonable period of time after...arrival in Canada” within the meaning of s. 98 of the Customs Act? - Whether the search conducted was an invasive one of the type described in the third category in R. v. Simmons [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495 - Whether either s. 98 of the Customs Act or the common law allows for the detention and search based on “reasonable suspicion” - Whether s. 7 or 8 of the Charter imposes a constitutional standard requiring that all cases involving the detention of persons believed to have ingested life threatening drugs be conducted under medical supervision - Whether the contraband excreted by a person under detention is properly classified as conscriptive or non conscriptive evidence.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Stupéfiants - Charte des droits et libertés - Détention - Saisie - Lois - Interprétation - Les juges majoritaires de la Cour d'appel ont-ils commis une erreur en parvenant à une conclusion différente de celle du juge du procès sur la question de savoir si les agents des douanes avaient des motifs raisonnables de croire que l'intimé dissimulait des stupéfiants dans son corps? - L'art. 98 de la Loi sur les douanes autorise‑t‑il la détention et la fouille d'une personne qui dissimule des stupéfiants dans son corps? - Qu'est-ce qu'un «délai justifiable suivant [l']arrivée» au sens de l'art. 98 de la Loi sur les douanes? - La fouille effectuée s'apparentait-elle à la fouille abusive évoquée dans la troisième catégorie décrite dans l'arrêt R. c. Simmons, [1988] 2 R.C.S. 495? - La détention et la fouille fondées sur un «soupçon raisonnable» sont-elles autorisées par l'art. 98 de la Loi sur les douanes ou par la common law? - L'art. 7 ou 8 de la Charte impose-t-il une norme constitutionnelle selon laquelle toutes les personnes détenues parce qu'elles auraient absorbé des drogues constituant un danger de mort doivent faire l'objet d'une fouille sous surveillance médicale? - La contrebande qu'une personne en détention expulse hors de son organisme est-elle ou non une preuve obtenue par mobilisation de cette personne contre elle-même?

AGENDA for the week beginning December 14, 1998.

ORDRE DU JOUR pour la semaine commençant le 14 décembre 1998.

Date of Hearing/                           Case Number and Name/    

Date d'audition                             Numéro et nom de la cause

The Court is not sitting this week

La Cour ne siège pas cette semaine

NOTE: 

This agenda is subject to change.  Hearing dates should be confirmed with Process Registry staff at (613) 996-8666.

Cet ordre du jour est sujet à modification.  Les dates d'audience devraient être confirmées auprès du personnel du greffe au (613) 996-8666.