Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

July 1998  1123 - 1177 (SPECIAL / SPÉCIAL)                                          Juillet 1998

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Robert Proudfoot Hess et al.

Brian A. Rumanek

v. (26304)

Fair-Day Investments Ltd. (Ont.)

Harvin D. Pitch

Teplitsky, Colson

FILING DATE 2.6.1998

Noëlla Arsenault-Cameron et al.

Robert A. McConnell

Campbell, Lea, Michael, McConnell & Pigot

v. (26682)

Government of Prince Edward Island (P.E.I.)

Roger B. Langille, Q.C.

FILING DATE 2.6.1998

Vincent Lore

Paul Skolnik

v. (26683)

Her Majesty The Queen (Qué.)

Richard Starck

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 26.5.1998

Bruce Hahn

Clayton C. Ruby

Ruby & Edwardh

v. (26685)

Her Majesty The Queen (P.E.I.)

James W. Gormley

Stewart McKelvey Stirling Scales

FILING DATE 4.6.1998

Dale Kroppmanns et al.

Donald A. Farquhar, Q.C.

Pearlman & Lindholm

v. (26686)

Pamela Jean Townsend (B.C.)

Aaron A.G. Gordon

Gordon & Velletta

FILING DATE 29.5.1998

Glen Charles Lalanne

Glen C. Lalanne

v. (26687)

Her Majesty The Queen (N.S.)

Kenneth W.F. Fiske, Q.C.

Attorney General of N.S.

FILING DATE 2.6.1998

Heinz Gunter Krapohl et al.

Brian H. Greenspan

Greenspan Humphrey Lavine

v. (26688)

Her Majesty The Queen et al. (Ont.)

George Dolhai

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 29.5.1998

United Artists Corp.

B.A. Crane, Q.C.

Gowling Strathy & Henderson

v. (26689)

Pink Panther Beauty Corp. (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

S. Chong

Lang Michener

FILING DATE 29.5.1998

Alexander Yaari

Timothy E. Breen

Fleming, Breen

v. (26690)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

David Finley

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 4.6.1998

Paul Wallach

David T. Parkatti

Smith Gawlinski Parkatti

v. (26693)

Blue Ridge Lumber (1981) Ltd. (Alta.)

Andrea B. Moen

Milner Fenerty

FILING DATE 4.6.1998

Garry B. Abraham et al.

Chris G. Paliare

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

v. (26694)

Coopers and Lybrand Ltd. et al. (Ont.)

Joseph W. Mik

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

FILING DATE 1.6.1998

Dr Gérard Monfette

Suzanne Côté       

Stikeman, Elliott

c. (26697)

Hôtel-Dieu de Saint-Jérôme et al. (Qué.)

André Ramier

Prévost Auclair Fortin D’Aoust

DATE DE PRODUCTION 1.6.1998

Marty Lorraine Morrisey

Malcolm S. Jeffcock

Nova Scotia Legal Aid

v. (26703)

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

David Meadows

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 25.5.1998

Heinz Gunter Krapohl et al.

Brian H. Greenspan

Greenspan Humphrey Lavine

v. (24584)

Federal Republic of Germany (Ont.)

George Dolhai

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 29.5.1998

Her Majesty The Queen

William F. Ehrcke, Q.C.

Min. of the A.G.

v. (26473)

Joann Kimberley White (B.C.)

Peter Burns

FILING DATE 17.6.1998

William O’Malley

William O’Malley

v. (26480)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Kenneth J. Yule

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 4.6.1998

Albany George Conrad

Larry L. Ross, Q.C.

Ross Hepner

v. (26643)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

Bernadette Schmaltz

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 8.6.1998

J.-J.L.

André Labelle

c. (26653)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

Henri-Pierre Labrie

Subs. procureur général

DATE DE PRODUCTION 25.5.1998

Dr. Michael Barry et al.

Henry S. Brown, Q.C.

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

v. (26655)

Andrea Marie Oakley et al. (N.S.)

Donald C. Shewfelt

Landry, McGillivray

FILING DATE 25.5.1998

M.S.

M.S.

v. (26696)

The National Parole Board et al. (F.C.A.)

Simon Fothergill

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 14.5.1998

Gordon Edward Ledinski

John M. Williams

Gerrand Rath Johnson

v. (26698)

Her Majesty The Queen (Sask.)

D.M. Brown, Q.C.

Saskatchewan Justice

FILING DATE 5.6.1998

Stefan Hadrian Comsa

Stefan Hadrian Comsa

v. (26700)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

Bart Rosborough

A.G. of Alberta

FILING DATE 1.6.1998

The Public School Boards’ Association of Alberta et al.

Dale Gibson

Dale Gibson Associates

v. (26701)

The Attorney General of Alberta et al. (Alta.)

Robert C. Maybank

A.G. of Alberta

FILING DATE 1.6.1998

Giovanni Didomizio et al.

Ronald G. Chapman

v. (26702)

Frank Porto et al. (Ont.)

Lawrence A. Pick

Bennett Best Burn

FILING DATE 15.6.1998

Great Tempo S.A.

Sean J. Harrington

McMaster Gervais

v. (26704)

Jian Sheng Co. Ltd. et al. (F.C.A.)

David F. McEwen

McEwen Schmitt & Co.

FILING DATE 11.6.1998

Her Majesty The Queen

Wayne Gorman

Dept. of Justice

v. (26705)

Glenn White (Nfld.)

William Collins

Collins & Associates

FILING DATE 11.6.1998

Ronald John Baas et al.

Michael R. Giroday

The Law Office of Michael R. Giroday

v. (26706)

Gail Lorraine Jellema (B.C.)

Robert C. Brun

Harris & Brun

FILING DATE 10.6.1998

Peter Kornelsen et al.

William W. Shores

Shores Belzil

v. (26707)

Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo (Alta.)

Kimberley D. Wakefield

Milner Fenerty

FILING DATE 1.6.1998

Nicodemo Sansalone

David P. Church

Camp Church & Associates

v. (26708)

The Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Co. (B.C.)

Mark Skorah

Skorah Doyle Khanna

FILING DATE 4.6.1998

Ellis-Don Ltd.

Earl A. Cherniak, Q.C.

Lerner & Associates

v. (26709)

The Ontario Labour Relations Board et al. (Ont.)

Sheila R. Block

Tory Tory Deslauriers & Binnington

FILING DATE 12.6.1998

Freda Evelyn Langenhahn et al.

Harold W. Veale, Q.C.

Ogilvie and Co.

v. (26710)

Richard M. Czyz et al. (Alta.)

Raymond C. Purdy

Brownlee Fryett

FILING DATE 15.6.1998

Her Majesty The Queen

Wayne Gorman

Dept. of Justice

v. (26712)

Ronald Charles Dalton (Nfld.)

Jerome Kennedy

Simmonds & Kennedy

FILING DATE 15.6.1998

Michael Gauthier et al.

Kevin T. Williams

Taylor McCaffrey

v. (26715)

Gerald Robert Mousseau (Man.)

Morris Kaufman

Kaufman Cassidy Ramsay

FILING DATE 19.6.1998

Hugh Abbey

Julian N. Falconer

Falconer, Macklin

v. (26716)

Her Majesty The Queen (Qué.)

Martin Lamontagne

A.G. for Quebec

FILING DATE 18.6.1998

Bharat Goel et al.

Bharat Goel

v. (26717)

Marion MacNeil et al. (Ont.)

Luke Saites

FILING DATE 14.5.1998

Thomas Peter Paul

Cleveland J. Allaby

v. (26718)

Her Majesty The Queen (N.B.)

J.T. Keith McCormick

A.G. of N.B.

FILING DATE 19.6.1998

Bharat Goel et al.

Bharat Goel

v. (26719)

Lawrence H. Mandel et al. (Ont.)

Benson Percival Brown

DATE DE PRODUCTION 14.5.1998

Ram Goel et al.

Anita Goel

v. (26720)

Timothy P. Boland et al. (Ont.)

B.A. Percival

Benson Percival Brown

FILING DATE 14.5.1998

Commonwealth Insurance Co.

Eric L. Clark

Clark & Latraverse

c. (26721)

Hôtel Le Chanteclerc (1985) Inc. et al. (Qué.)

Guy Pépin

Pépin, Létourneau

DATE DE PRODUCTION 18.6.1998

Howard White et al.

Neil Finkelstein

Davies Ward & Beck

v. (26722)

Raffaele Cugliari (Ont.)

Terence J. Collier

Dutton, Brock, MacIntyre & Collier

FILING DATE 19.6.1998

Patricia Joan Marie Hill

Ingrid Lincoln

Perlov Stewart Lincoln

v. (26724)

Florence McMillan et al. (Man.)

Chris Fulmyk

Broadway Law Corp.

FILING DATE 23.6.1998

Marthe Gagnon

Marthe Gagnon

c. (26726)

La Métropolitaine, Compagnie d’assurances (Qué.)

Marzia Frascadore

Lafleur Brown

DATE DE PRODUCTION 12.6.1998

John Zaretski

Kevin A. Clarke

Merchant Law Group

v. (26727)

The Workers’ Compensation Board et al. (Sask.)

Robert G. Richards

McPherson, Leslie & Tyerman

FILING DATE 23.6.1998

Brian Doody

Brian Doody

v. (26729)

Canada (Employment Insurance Commission) et al. (F.C.A.)

Carole Bureau

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 11.5.1998

JUNE 8, 1998 / LE 8 JUIN 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

                                                                                    Her Majesty the Queen

                                                                                                v. (26535)

                                                                          Richard Floyd Oickle (Crim.)(N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law -  Evidence - Police - Confessions - Polygraph tests - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling the Respondent’s inculpatory statements inadmissible - Whether the tactics used by police to extract a confession were improper.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                      Troy Allan Bukmeier

                                                                                                v. (26579)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Whether the British Columbia Court of Appeal erred in law in finding that the trial judge correctly instructed the jury that s. 34(2)  of the Criminal Code  was only available to the Applicant if he had intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                             Werner Naef, Jean-Marc Duval, and Peter Smith

                                                                                                v. (26389)

                                                                            McLean Brothers Fisheries Inc.

-and-

Jane Barnett and Canadian Association of Fish Exporters,

Kingsville Fisherman’s Company Ltd., Top Coq S.A.,

Walter Herrlich, Omstead Foods Limited (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Libel and slander - Procedural law - Pre-trial procedure - Pleadings - Application to strike out statement of claim against certain defendants - Chambers judge dismissing defamation action against three defendants - Court of Appeal reversing decision - Whether an individual can be held personally responsible for alleged acts of libel in circumstances where the conduct complained of  was performed within the scope of the individual’s employment - Whether the reasoning of the Court of Appeal which relieves an employee acting within the scope of his or her employment from personal liability, in the circumstances of the intentional tort of interference with economic relations, can be applied to the circumstances of the alleged intentional tort of libel.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                     Roland Home Improvements Limited and Shahnaz Dadvand

                                                                                                v. (26528)

                                                                             National Bank of Canada (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Courts - Jurisdiction - Ontario Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction under Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990,  c. C.43, to hear appeals from interlocutory orders granted by Ontario Court (General Division) - Appeals lie to Divisional Court  - Whether Court of Appeal properly quashed an appeal because it lacked jurisdiction.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                       Virgil Lee Big Eagle

                                                                                                v. (26553)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Section 7- Criminal Law - Procedural Law - Evidence - Application to admit as “fresh evidence” evidence that crown witness had recanted his trial testimony - Whether the test for the admission of fresh evidence should be reassessed in light of reform to the hearsay rule.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                        Sandra E. Gernhart

                                                                                                v. (26469)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Whether financial assistance given to the Applicant by her employer to offset the increased income tax burden imposed upon her as a consequence of change in residence from the United States to Canada is income from office or employment under sections 5  and 6  of the Income Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. I-1  (5th Supp.).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                             Ronald Fortin

                                                                                                c. (26552)

                                           Jean Gosselin, Jean-Guy Lévesque et Réjean Germain (C.A.F.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Relations de travail - Législation - Interprétation - Plainte du demandeur reprochant au syndicat de ne pas avoir traité un grief de harcèlement - Plainte rejetée parce que déposée hors délai - Application des paragraphes 97(1)  et (2)  du Code canadien du travail , L.R.C. (1985), chap. L-2  - Application de l’arrêt Upper Lake Shipping Ltd., [1979] 1 R.C.S. 902, - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle commis une erreur en rejetant la demande de contrôle judiciaire du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Mary Robinson and Evelyn Gertrude Robinson, The Trustees of the Percival Samuel Robinson Trust

                                                                                                v. (26513)

                                                                       Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.A.)(Man.)

AND BETWEEN:

Mary Robinson, The Trustee of the Robert Simon Robinson Trust

v. (26513)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.A.)(Man.)

AND BETWEEN:

Mary Robinson, The Trustee of the Evelyn Gertrude Robinson Trust

v. (26513)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.A.)(Man.)

AND BETWEEN:

Mary Robinson, The Trustee of the Linda Dale Robinson Trust

v. (26513)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.A.)(Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Eligibility of limited partners for graduated tax rates - Limited partner not taking part in the management of the partnership nor the conduct of its business but held to have carried on the partnership’s business for the purposes of applying a flat tax rate under paragraph 122(2) (c) of the Income Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.1 (5th Supp .) - Whether merely being a limited partner means carrying on partnership business - Whether sections of the Partnership Act of Manitoba, R.S.M. 1987, c. P-30, should determine if a limited partner is carrying on the partnership’s business for income tax purposes.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

                                                                                   Nicholas Quinn Lapointe

                                                                                                v. (26578)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Sentencing - Conditional sentence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in substituting a sentence of one year actual imprisonment for the conditional sentence imposed - Whether the sentence imposed by the trial judge was clearly unreasonable so as to justify the Court of Appeal in varying the sentence that had been imposed - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that a conditional sentence was not appropriate in the circumstances of this case.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Carpenter Fishing Corporation, Don Johannes, Kaarina Etheridge, White Hope Holdings Ltd.,

Simpson Fishing Co. Ltd. and Norman Johnson

                                                                                                v. (26484)

                                              Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada and Bernard Valcourt,

Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

AND BETWEEN:

Titan Fishing Ltd.

v. (26484)

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada and Bernard Valcourt, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Judicial review - Imposition of a quota policy for halibut fishing on the west coast of Canada - Formula took into account historical performance of the licence, restricted to its current owner of licence - Applicants contending that a catch history allocation based on the licence itself is more democratic - What criteria determine whether or not a governmental measure is of a policy or legislative nature - What is the standard for judicial review of policy/legislative discretion if there is not absolute immunity from review - Whether or not policy/legislative discretion can be the subject of a legitimate expectation of consultation - Whether an appellate court may disregard findings of fact in the absence of palpable and overriding error - Fisheries Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.  F-14 .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                               65302 British Columbia Ltd.

(Formerly Veekens Poultry Farms Ltd.)

                                                                                                v. (26352)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Business tax - Deductions - Whether a levy on chickens kept in excess of the Applicant’s quota was deductible - Whether the Court of Appeal correctly asked whether an expense that meets the purpose of s.18(1) (a) of the Income Tax Act  should none the less be denied as offending a test of morality or public policy.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION -- REHEARING /

DEMANDES DE RÉEXAMEN -- NOUVELLE AUDITION

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Major

Wayne B. Carter v. Patricia J. Boardman, et al. (N.B.)  25921

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Bastarache JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Bastarache

Nandu Patel v. Department of National Health and Welfare (F.C.A.)(Ont.)   25997

JUNE 15, 1998 / LE 15 JUIN 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

                                                                            The Attorney General of Canada

                                                                                                v. (26534)

                                                                         Wanda Marie Halpert (Crim.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Procedural Law - Restraint and Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime - Whether any forfeiture order relating to restrained proceeds of crime extinguishes the restraint order governing that property - Whether a court has jurisdiction to vary a restraining order with respect to one person’s interest in the restrained property after an order has been made forfeiting another person’s interest in the property.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                                    D.J.S.

                                                                                                v. (26573)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Sexual assault - Oath versus oath - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the learned trial judge did not explicitly err in applying reasonable doubt to the evidence in the proceeding - Whether the trial judge disregarded the Applicant’s evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                                    T.B.K.

                                                                                                v. (26581)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Criminal - Criminal Law - Whether the right to be presumed innocent is violated by the reverse onus of proof required in s.350 (b)(ii) of the Criminal Code  which stipulates that a person deemed to have broken and entered bears the onus of proving lawful justification or excuse - Whether the stipulation in s. 348(2) (a) of the Criminal Code  that evidence of break and entry is evidence of break and entry with intent to commit an indictable offence is reasonable within the meaning of s. 1  of the Charter  - Whether the application of the deeming provision in s.350(b)(ii) and the common-law doctrine of constructive breaking to s. 348(2)(a) is saved by s. 1  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                       Jeffrey Aaron Beyer

                                                                                                v. (26437)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Sentencing - Multiple sentences on eight counts of fraud - Sentences to be served in three consecutive groups of terms of imprisonment - On appeal cumulative total of terms of imprisonment reduced from 13.5 years to 9 years - Whether fair hearing denied on appeal - Whether sentences should have been reduced further - Whether cumulative total of 9 years is excessive, cruel and unusual punishment - Whether gambling is an addiction.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                    Kathryn Ann Grimsson

                                                                                                v. (26595)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Sentencing - Parole - Parole Ineligibility - Fitness of sentence - Whether the sentencing judge erred in considering public opinion in determining the sentence - Whether the trial judge erred in not advising defence counsel prior to imposing sentence that he would not follow the joint submission on parole ineligibility.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                         Free World Trust

c. (26406)

Électro Santé inc., Paul Demers, Noël Desjardins (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit des biens - Brevets d’invention - Contrefaçon - Appareil électromagnétique servant à des fins thérapeutiques - Absence de définition de la “contrefaçon” dans la Loi sur les brevets, L.R.C., ch. P-4 - Définition de la “contrefaçon” en droit canadien - Méthode d’interprétation utilisée par les tribunaux chargés d’interpréter un brevet d’invention en cas d’allégations de contrefaçon - Critères et champ d’application de la méthode adoptée par la Cour d’appel fédérale dans O’Hara Manufacturing Ltd. c. Eli Lilly & Co., (1990) 26 C.P.R. (3d) 1 - Demanderesse alléguant absence de règles uniformes et cohérentes.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

                                                                                     Richard Alan Noname

                                                                                                v. (26543)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Defence - Self-defence - Charge to the jury - Whether the trial judge erred in law in his instructions to the jury on the defence of self-defence and whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to direct a new trial- Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that there was no air of reality to the defence of self-defence, that self-defence should not have been before the jury and that any errors in the charge to the jury on self-defence were insufficiently prejudicial to the Applicant to constitute a substantial miscarriage of justice - Whether the trial judge’s charge to the jury on attempted murder was erroneous in law, confusing and prejudicial to the Applicant and whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to direct a new trial.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                     Doris Mae Eisenhauer

                                                                                                v. (26561)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Appeal - Curative proviso - Criminal Code  s. 686(1) (b)(iii) - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying the curative proviso in this case.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                                Daryl Bax

                                                                                                v. (26515)

                                                                  The Workers’ Compensation Board (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Workers’ Compensation - Administrative law - Judicial review - Statutes - Legislation - Interpretation - The Workers’ Compensation Act, 1979, S.S. 1979, c. W-17.1 - Whether the Court of Appeal applied the appropriate standard of review - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by concluding that the legislative scheme of the Act gave the Board the jurisdiction and discretion to determine the amount of the Applicant’s compensation benefits.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                               Air Canada

                                                                                                v. (26421)

                                                                               Ticketnet Corporation (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Damages - Contracts - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not deducting the opportunity cost in assessing the damages - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not granting a new trial on the issue of damages - Whether trial judge deprived the Applicant of its fundamental right to cross-examine on substantive issues relating to damages - Whether the Court of Appeal ought to have held that it was an error in law fatal to the assessment of damages for lost profits for a new venture such as the Respondent to ignore evidence of similar enterprises carrying on that business in the marketplace.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JUNE 22, 1998 / LE 22 JUIN 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

                                                                                       Jean-Marie Roussel

                                                                                                c. (26551)

                                                                           Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Procès - Directives au jury - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en déterminant que les directives du juge de première instance étaient suffisantes lorsque lues dans leur ensemble, et ce malgré les contradictions et les lacunes concernant l’évaluation de la preuve et l’application du principe du doute raisonnable contrairement aux arrêts R. c. Lifchus, [1997] 3 R.C.S. 320, et R. c. W(D.), [1991] 1 R.C.S. 742?- La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en déterminant que la preuve présentée par la Couronne était écrasante et conséquemment que le sous-al. 686(1)b)(iii) du C.cr . pouvait trouver son application en dépit du fait que l’erreur reprochée au juge de première instance portait sur la notion de doute raisonnable, notion intimement liée au principe fondamental de la présomption d’innocence?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                         Ian Fergus Hunter

                                                                                                v. (26580)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Appointment of counsel - Section 684(1)  of the Criminal Code  - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the Applicant’s motion.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

September 25, 1997

Supreme Court of British Columbia

(Drake J.)

Conviction: cultivation of marihuana; possession of marihuana for the purpose of trafficking; possession of a restricted drug

                                                                                                     M.S.

                                                                                                v. (26696)

                           The National Parole Board and the Deputy Commissioner of Corrections (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Whether Federal Court of Appeal has inherent jurisdiction to waive filing fees -  Right of appeal from order of single judge of Federal Court of Appeal - Whether order refusing production of transcripts is integral part of order sought to be appealed.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                         Patricia A. Burke

                                                                                                v. (26512)

                                                 Workers’ Compensation Board of Prince Edward Island (P.E.I.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Workers’ compensation - Board decision to terminate benefits to nurse claiming to suffer from “Multiple Chemical Sensitivity” as a result of exposure to fumes in the workplace - Conflicting medical opinions - Decision of Board upheld on appeal - Whether appellate court erred in holding that it had no jurisdiction to interfere with Board’s findings of fact - Whether appellate court erred in holding that the Board gave the Applicant the benefit of the doubt pursuant to section 12 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, R.S.P.E.I. 1988, Cap. W-7.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Alta Limitée, Argo Construction Inc., Broccolini Construction Inc., Cegerco Constructeur Inc.,

Cetil Inc., Consortium M.R. Canada Ltée, Construction Château St-Marc Inc., Construction Socam Ltée, Les Constructions Sicor Inc., Divco Limitée, Magil Construction Canada Ltée,

Oméga Canada division de Sogedec Inc., Quégéco Inc. et Société Désourdy 1949 Inc.

                                                                                                c. (26533)

La Corporation des maîtres mécaniciens en tuyauterie du Québec,  la Corporation des maîtres électriciens

du Québec et l’Association de la construction du Québec

                                                                                                        et

                                   L’Association des constructeurs de routes et grands travaux du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial - Code civil - Contrats - Validité du Code provincial du Bureau des soumissions déposées du Québec (ci-après le “Code”) - Contrat d’adhésion - Liberté de commerce et liberté contractuelle - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en droit en concluant que les intimées pouvaient légalement conclure l’entente du 1^er septembre 1993 qui promulguait le Code? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en concluant que le Code ne porte pas illégalement atteinte à la liberté de commerce? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en concluant que l’article C-2 du Code, en vertu duquel les entrepreneurs généraux doivent adhérer au Code, ne constitue pas un contrat d’adhésion dont les dispositions sont abusives et déraisonnables?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                          Rodrigue Girard

                                                                                                c. (26559)

                                                   Corporation municipale de Saint-Léonard de Portneuf (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit municipal - Municipalités - Infractions au règlement de zonage - Délivrance par l’inspecteur de la municipalité d’un permis de construction au demandeur - Annulation deux jours plus tard du permis de construction par l’inspecteur - Poursuite des travaux de construction - Acquittement du demandeur des trois infractions au règlement de zonage en Cour municipale - Appel de la municipalité accueillie par le juge Desjardins en Cour supérieure - Demandeur reconnu coupable de deux des trois infractions - Requête du demandeur pour permission d’appel en Cour d’appel rejetée par le juge Otis - Requête subséquente du demandeur en mandamus en vue d’obtenir la délivrance d’un permis de construction accordée compte tenu d’une entente entre les parties - Requête de l’intimée en irrecevabilité de la requête du demandeur en évocation de la décision du juge Desjardins du 24 mai 1995 accueillie - Première requête en rétractation de la décision du juge Desjardins du 24 mai 1995 rejetée - Demande d’autorisation d’appel 25688 à l’encontre de la décision du juge Otis de la Cour d’appel rejetée le 20 mars 1997 - Confirmation par la Cour d’appel de la décision de la Cour supérieure d’accueillir la requête du demandeur en mandamus -  Seconde requête en rétractation de la décision du juge Desjardins du 24 mai 1995 rejetée -  Requête pour permission d’appel relativement à la seconde requête en rétractation rejetée  - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle commis une erreur en rejetant la requête pour permission d’appel?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 31 janvier 1995

Cour municipale de Saint-Raymond (Côté J.C.M.)

Demandeur acquitté de trois infractions au règlement de zonage

                                                                                        Claude Deslauriers

                                                                                                c. (26565)

                                                     Le Bureau de l’OAGQ, l’Office des professions du Québec

- et -

Le Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

ENTRE:

Claude Deslauriers

c. (26565)

Roch Labelle, a.g., ès qualité de syndic

- et -

L’Office des professions du Québec (Qué.)

ENTRE:

Claude Deslauriers

c. (26565)

Roch Labelle, a.g., ès qualité de syndic

- et -

L’Office des professions du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel -  Requêtes du demandeur en injonction interlocutoire et pour interdire à Roch Labelle d’exercer la fonction de syndic de l’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres rejetées par la Cour supérieure, qui conclut que l’exigence d’indépendance du syndic mentionnée à l’art. 121 du Code des professions, L.R.Q., ch. C-26, ne signifie pas que ce dernier doive exercer cette fonction à temps plein - Décision portée en appel par le demandeur - Requêtes des intimés en rejet d’appel alléguant la non-existence du droit d’appel et le caractère abusif et dilatoire de l’appel (art. 501(2) et (5) du Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q., ch. C-25) - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en accordant les requêtes en rejet d’appel?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                        Claude Deslauriers

                                                                                                c. (26591)

                                           Bureau de direction de l’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres du Québec,

                         Yvon Chabot, a.-g., en sa qualité de secrétaire-général du Bureau de direction de l’OAGQ,

                                                  le Tribunal des professions, l’honorable Jacques Biron, j.c.q.,

                                   l’honorable Paule Lafontaine, j.c.q. et l’honorable André Quesnel, j.c.q. (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - Appel du demandeur rejeté par le Tribunal des professions en raison du défaut de produire son mémoire - Requête en révision judiciaire et en mandamus rejetée par la Cour supérieure - Requête pour rejet de l’appel du demandeur en raison de son caractère abusif et dilatoire accordée par la Cour d’appel - La Cour supérieure et la Cour d’appel ont-elles erré en laissant intact un jugement du Tribunal des professions qui fait passer la procédure avant le droit?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:    Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

                                                                                   Delbert Wallace McCaw

                                                                                                v. (26589)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Vetrovec warning - Corroborative evidence - Evidence of reaction to  polygraph testing - Whether the lower courts erred in describing some evidence as capable of corroborating the evidence of two admitted participants in the crime - Whether this evidence was either neutral in its probative value or not independent of the accomplices - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial judge had not caused prejudice to the Applicant by providing too many examples of purportedly corroborative evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the trial judge’s decision not to allow defence counsel to question a witness and suspect on her demeanour during and her reactions to polygraph testing.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                 Stanley Livingston, Junior

                                                                                                v. (26609)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Defence - Evidence - Trial - Charge to the jury - Whether trial judge’s charge to the jury failed to follow R. v. Vetrovec, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 822 - Whether a caution should have applied against accepting evidence of a witness - Whether proof of prior inconsistent statement improperly prevented - Whether voir dire should have been held to consider reliability of statements sought to be admitted for the truth of their contents - Whether trial judge fairly presented evidence and theory of defence to jury.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                      Town of Port McNeill

                                                                                                v. (26628)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedural law - Courts - Jurisdiction - Costs - Statutes - Statutory instruments - Interpretation - Whether  the cost provisions in the Offence Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.338, ss.79 and 80 and the Criminal Code , ss.809  and 840  should be interpreted to include the jurisdiction for a Summary Conviction Trial Court to award all expenses properly incurred in the defence or prosecution of a complaint where a Justice considers it reasonable to do so.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION -- REHEARING /

DEMANDE DE RÉEXAMEN -- NOUVELLE AUDITION

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

M-Jay Farms Enterprises Ltd., suing on its own behalf and on behalf of all other holders of permit v. Canadian Wheat Board (Man.)  26346

JUNE 25, 1998 / LE 25 JUIN 1998

CORAM:   Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

                                                                                      Thomas Bruce Baker

                                                                                                v. (26562)

                                                                               Monica Frieda Francis (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Divorce - Spousal and child maintenance - Application of Federal Child Support Guidelines - Incomes over $150,000 - Whether Court of Appeal erred in ordering Applicant to pay Table amount pursuant to ss. 4(a) of the Guidelines - Whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting meaning of “inappropriate” pursuant to ss. 4(b) of the Guidelines - Lump sum spousal support - Whether Court of Appeal erred in applying the principles set out in Moge v. Moge, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 813 in ordering Applicant to pay lump sum of $500,000 to Respondent.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JUNE 29, 1998 / LE 29 JUIN 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

                                                                                      John Carlos Terceira

                                                                                                v. (26546)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - DNA evidence - Burden of proof - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that DNA statistical evidence is admissible in criminal trials - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to hold that forensic laboratories applying a novel scientific technique should be subject to special scrutiny pursuant to R. v. Mohan - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Crown is not required to prove the reliability of a novel DNA technique beyond a reasonable doubt.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                                      T.G.

                                                                                                v. (26550)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Reverse onus - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that ss. 128 and 130(1) of the Liquor Control Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 260  were inapplicable to the prosecution - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s. 794  of the Criminal Code  was applicable to the case instead - Whether ss. 128 and 130(1) of the Liquor Control Act violate s. 11(d)  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                    Germain Jean Poudrier

                                                                                                v. (26554)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Right to counsel - Whether the Court of Appeal misinterpreted the decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada when it held that upon arrest an individual need not be given information concerning the existence of a toll-free telephone line to access duty counsel - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in only applying requirements of the decision in R. v. Brydges, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 190 to the facts of this case - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not determining if the evidence admitted at trial should have been excluded under s. 24(2)  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                 Michael Casimir Lagowski

                                                                                                v. (26635)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in not dealing with two fundamental legal issues raised by the Applicant relating to the complainant’s testimony as to what she had been told by police regarding a confession by the Applicant - Whether the trial judge had held that there was an onus on the Applicant to raise a reasonable doubt as to his guilt when he said that Applicant “has not succeeded in raising a reasonable doubt as to his guilt” - Applicability of R. v. W.D., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                        Bevis Dean Durack

                                                                                                v. (26660)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Criminal - Criminal law - Pre-trial procedure - Jurisdiction - Appeal - Abuse of process - Stay of proceedings - Unreasonable delay - Whether the Court of Appeal had supervisory jurisdiction to review the pretrial ruling made in this case - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the Crown’s use of the stay provision did not constitute an abuse of process - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in concluding that the Applicant’s right to be tried within a reasonable time was not infringed.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                              Jules Fafard

                                                                                                c. (26585)

                                                                   Commission de la construction du Québec

                                                                                                        et

                                                                        Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Droit du travail - Relations de travail - Législation - Interprétation - Industrie de la construction - Compétence constitutionnelle - Liberté d’association - Obligation d’appartenir à une association d’employeurs - Les articles 28, 40 et 41 de la Loi sur les relations de travail, la formation professionnelle et la gestion de la main-d’oeuvre dans l’industrie de la construction, L.R.Q., chap. R- 20, portent-ils atteinte à l’alinéa 3d)  de la Charte canadienne  et à l’article 3 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., chap. C-12 - Contestation du demandeur en reprise d’instance rejetée - Requête du demandeur pour permission d’appel rejetée.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                             Pierre Trudel

                                                                                                c. (26544)

                                                                                         Sûreté du Québec

et

Comité d’appel pour les fonctionnaires non régis par une convention collective

et

Me Jean-Paul Roberge, ès qualité de commissaire, membre du Comité d’appel (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Relations de travail - Législation - Interprétation - Service continu -  Conditions pour obtenir la permanence au sein de la fonction publique - L’article 14 de la Loi sur la fonction publique, L.R.Q., chap. F-3.1.1, permet-il au demandeur de computer la période de travail effectuée  avant son acte de titularisation pour les fins de l’acquisition de sa permanence?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                        Claude Deslauriers

                                                                                                c. (26592)

                           Roch Labelle, a.-g., es qualité de syndic principal de l’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres

du Québec, Jean-Charles Legault, a.-g., es qualité de syndic-adjoint de l’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres du Québec, le Tribunal des professions et honorable juge Claude Pothier, j.c.q.

- et -

Le comité de discipline de l’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Droit des professions - Contrôle judiciaire - Compétence - Législation - Interprétation - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en concluant que l’art. 121 du Code des professions, L.R.Q., ch. C-26, n’interdit pas le cumul des fonctions de syndic et d’arpenteur-géomètre? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en concluant que la décision du Tribunal des professions refusant de suspendre l’exécution d’une ordonnance de radiation provisoire n’était pas susceptible de révision judiciaire? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en négligeant de se prononcer sur les conséquences du changement d’état de l’intimé Legault et sur la fausseté d’un affidavit produit par les intimés?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL