Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

January 16, 1998  1 - 64                                                                   le 16 janvier 1998

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

L.C.

Mary A. Marshall

Cook, Duke, Cox

v. (26358)

Brian Joseph Mills et al. (Alta.)

Dennis Edney

Edney, Hattersley & Dolphin

FILING DATE 4.12.1997

Her Majesty in Right of Newfoundland et al.

George P. Horan, Q.C.

Dept. of Justice - Civil Division

v. (26362)

Andrew Wells (Nfld.)

Gillian D. Butler, Q.C.

White, Ottenheimer & Baker

FILING DATE 5.12.1997

Roland Bergeron

Roland Bergeron

c. (26364)

Union des agents de sécurité du Québec métallurgistes unis d’Amérique, local 8922 et al. (Qué.)

Kathleen Cahill

Melançon, Marceau, Grenier & Sciortino

DATE DE PRODUCTION 1.12.1997

Roland Bergeron

Roland Bergeron

c. (26365)

Le Corps canadien des commissionnaires et al. (Qué.)

Catherine Pilon

Byers Casgrain

DATE DE PRODUCTION 1.12.1997

James Alistair French

Harvey T. Strosberg

Gignac, Sutts

v. (26368)

Pamela A. Chapman et al. (Ont.)

David W. Scott

Scott & Aylen

FILING DATE 4.12.1997

Adbusters Media Foundation

Michael P. Doherty

B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centre

v. (26369)

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (B.C.)

John D. Mostowich

Ratcliff & Co.

FILING DATE 8.12.1997

Andrew Donnelly

Roy E. Stephenson

Stephenson & Stephenson

v. (26371)

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

Kathyrn Philpott

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 10.12.1997

Emmanuel Feuerwerker

Emmanuel Feuerwerker

c. (26374)

Michael Roodman (Ont.)

Lyon Gilbert

Gold, Gilbert, Mann

DATE DE PRODUCTION 8.12.1997

Dara Wilder

Albert W. Eyolfson

Inkster, Christie, Hughes, Mackay

v. (26375)

Hersh Wolch (Man.)

Barry Gorlick, Q.C.

Monk, Goodwin

FILING DATE 10.12.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

Matthew Britton

Manitoba Justice

v. (26376)

Jeromie Keith D. Proulx (Man.)

Timothy J. Killeen

Wolch Pinx Tapper Scurfield

FILING DATE 16.12.1997

Rita D. Caplan

Rita D. Caplan

v. (26381)

The Minister of Human Resources Development (F.C.A.)

Graham Garton, Q.C.

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 12.12.1997

Aristeo Gascon

Gil D. McKinnon, Q.C.

v. (26383)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

John Gordon

Min. of the A.G.

FILING DATE 15.12.1997

Assurance-vie Desjardins

Alain Robichaud

de Grandpré, Godin

c. (26382)

Le Sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec et al. (Qué.)

Robert Bouzelli

Veillette & Assoc.

DATE DE PRODUCTION 22.12.97

The Canadian Mobile Sign Association et al.

Steven Gearing

Brodkin Gearing Cohen

v. (26277)

The Corporation of the City of Burlington et al. (Ont.)

J.G. Richards

Weir & Foulds

FILING DATE 5.12.1997

Dr. Donald G. Zink

Colin K. Irving

Colin Irving & Associates

v. (26314)

Graybec Immobilier Inc. et al. (Qué.)

Jean G. Bertrand

Ogilvy, Renault

FILING DATE 12.12.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

Matthew Britton

Manitoba Justice

v. (26339)

Thomas Andrew Bunn (Man.)

Frederick L. Bortoluzzi

Henderson Legal Centre

FILING DATE 16.12.1997

Gilles Poulin

Mireille Arseneault

Arseneault, Barakatt

c. (26340)

Serge Morency et Associés Inc. et al. (Qué.)

Daniel O’Brien

O’Brien et Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 9.12.1997

Canadian Pacific Limited

J. Edward Gouge, Q.C.

Lawson Lundell Lawson & McIntosh

v. (26363)

Matsqui Indian Band et al. (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

Arthur Pape

Pape & Salter

FILING DATE 9.12.1997

Nancy Brohman et al.

Katherine J. Young

O’Grady & Young

v. (26367)

Ginus Raymond Jonkman et al. (Ont.)

Donna M. Crabtree

Soloway, Wright

FILING DATE 5.12.1997

University of Saskatchewan

R.H. McKercher, Q.C.

McKercher McKercher & Whitmore

v. (26370)

Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. of Canada, now known as Wellington General Insurance Company et al. (Sask.)

Peter Foley, Q.C.

Gauley & Company

FILING DATE 8.12.1997

Philip Brown Matthews et al.

John D. Brownlie, Q.C.

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

v. (26372)

Iris Nowell (Ont.)

Stephen M. Grant

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

FILING DATE 8.12.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

Matthew Britton

Manitoba Justice

v. (26377)

R. (R.A.) (Man.)

D.C.H. McCaffrey, Q.C.

Taylor McCaffrey

FILING DATE 16.12.1997

Deschamps Pontiac Buick Ltée

Jean-Marie Larivière

Meloche, Larivière, Avocats

c. (26379)

Benoît Monette, ès qualités de commissaire du travail et al. (Qué.)

Guy Roy

DATE DE PRODUCTION 12.12.1997

Cathryn Messer

E.F. Anthony Merchant, Q.C.

Merchant Law Group

v. (26380)

Allan Messer (Sask.)

E.R. Gritzfeld, Q.C.

Gerrand Rath Johnson

FILING DATE 12.12.1997

David Jonathan Wild

David Jonathan Wild

v. (26384)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Robert A. Mulligan

Office of Crown Counsel

FILING DATE 8.12.1997

Citizens’ Legal Challenge Inc. et al.

Raj Anand

Scott & Aylen

v. (26385)

Attorney General of Ontario (Ont.)

Robert E. Charney

Min. of the A.G.

FILING DATE 9.12.1997

Charles Kieling et al.

Charles Kieling

v. (26386)

Canadian Pacific Ltd. et al. (Sask.)

Randal S. Van De Mosselaer

MacLeod Dixon

FILING DATE 4.12.1997

K.V.N.G.W.

Darren MacLeod

Nova Scotia Legal Aid

v. (26388)

Her Majesty The Queen (N.S.)

Robert E. Lutes, Q.C.

A.G. of Nova Scotia

FILING DATE 18.12.1997

DECEMBER 19, 1997 / LE 19 DÉCEMBRE 1997

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                                     Royal Bank of Canada

                                                                                          v. (26315, 26316)

                                                                 Director of Investigation and Research (Ont.)

AND BETWEEN:

                                               Canadian Pacific Limited and CP Containers (Bermuda) Limited

                                                                                                v. (26318)

                                                                 Director of Investigation and Research (Ont.)

AND BETWEEN:

                                                                          CP Containers (Bermuda) Limited

                                                                                                v. (26319)

                                                                 Director of Investigation and Research (Ont.)

AND BETWEEN:

                                                                                   Canadian Pacific Limited

                                                                                                v. (26317)

                                                                 Director of Investigation and Research (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASES

Commercial Law - Combines - Administrative Law - Appeal - Competition Bureau began investigating a merger involving Applicants - During the investigation the Director of Investigation and Research of Competition Bureau obtained judicial orders compelling production of documents and examinations of witnesses under section 11  of the Competition Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34  - Director filed a notice of application to dissolve the merger with the Competition Tribunal - Applicants claimed some documents sought by Bureau were protected by privilege - Applicants claimed Director not entitled to pursue examinations and disclosure pursuant to section 11 after filing notice of application with Competition Tribunal - Ontario Court (General Division) ordered continuance of examinations, production of documents, and production of facts contained in documents over which Applicants continued to claim privilege - Court of Appeal for Ontario quashed appeals for want of jurisdiction - Whether Ontario Court (General Division) breached Applicants’ rights to solicitor-client privilege - Whether Ontario Court (General Division) properly ordered continuance of section 11 discovery process - Whether Court of Appeal for Ontario had jurisdiction to hear appeals of orders.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                             Yoke Wah Jonasson, also known as Eva Jonasson

                                                                                                v. (26250)

                                                                             William Brian Jonasson (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Maintenance - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the principles of child or spousal support under the Divorce Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.3 (2nd Supp .) - Whether the Court of Appeal for the province of British Columbia erred in not applying the federal child support guidelines of May 1, 1979 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not compensating the Applicant and the children of the parties for disadvantage arising from the Respondent’s non-access to the children - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the separation agreement valid - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the trial judge’s discretionary award of costs.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

May  1, 1997

Supreme Court of British Columbia (Errico J.)

Application for compensatory spousal maintenance and child support dismissed

June 12, 1995

Supreme Court of British Columbia (Errico J.)

Supplemental reasons for judgment: the Applicant to pay nine-fourteenths of the Respondent’s costs including disbursements

July 18, 1997

Court of Appeal for British Columbia

(Esson, Hollinrake and Ryan JJ.A.)

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                          Jozef Grochocki

                                                                                                v. (26239)

                                                                   Solicitor General of Canada (F.C.A.)(Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Whether the Court of Appeal correctly determined that it had no jurisdiction to grant an extension of time in which to appeal from a decision of the Federal Court (Trial Division).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                        Claude Deslauriers

                                                                                                c. (26301)

                                L’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres du Québec, Roch Labelle, ès qualité de syndic,

                                                          Jean-Charles Legault, ès qualité de syndic-adjoint et

Yvon Chabot, ès qualité de secrétaire-général de l’O.A.G.Q.

- et -

Le comité de discipline de l’Ordre des arpenteurs-géomètres du Québec, l’Office des

professions du Québec, le Tribunal des professions du Québec et le Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - Compétence - Accès aux tribunaux - Ordonnance de la Cour supérieure obligeant le demandeur à obtenir l’autorisation préalable d’un juge avant d’intenter de nouvelles procédures contre les intimés - Le juge de première instance pouvait-il restreindre le droit du demandeur de recourir aux tribunaux? - Est-ce que trois juges de la Cour d’appel du Québec ont compétence pour réviser le jugement d’un juge unique de la même Cour refusant au demandeur la permission d’en appeler?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                            Intercredit Establishment Vaduz

                                                                                                c. (26134)

                                                    Ville de Pincourt et le Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit municipal - Droit fiscal - Taxes foncières basées sur la superficie des immeubles - Validité - Lorsqu’un règlement municipal impose une taxe foncière spéciale pour défrayer le coût de travaux d’infrastructures à deux secteurs distincts de propriétaires, soit ceux qui retirent des travaux un bénéfice éventuel et à long terme et ceux qui en retirent un bénéfice immédiat, la municipalité doit-elle créer deux bassins de taxation de façon à ce que les propriétaires de chaque secteur ne supportent le fardeau fiscal de ces travaux que dans la proportion du bénéfice qu’ils en retirent? - Les règlements municipaux attaqués en l’espèce sont-ils nuls, abusifs, déraisonnables, injustes, oppressifs et discriminatoires au motif qu’ils violent le principe qu’une taxe foncière spéciale doit être imposée aux bénéficiaires et proportionnellement au bénéfice que ceux-ci en retirent?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                    Frederick Sengmueller

                                                                                                v. (26235)

                                      Holden Day Wilson, Charles Cochran Mark and Thomas G. Bastedo (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Appeal - Quashing appeals - Whether Court of Appeal properly quashed appeal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache JJ. /

Les juges Iacobucci, Major et Bastarache

                                                                                                    L.J.H.

                                                                                                v. (26296)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Full answer and defence - Whether the effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeal is to not allow a trial judge discretion to enter a judicial stay of proceedings when the court is satisfied that the accused cannot make full answer and defence within the meaning of the Criminal Code  and ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter - Whether the effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeal is to force an accused to have to rely solely on the Crown’s obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in circumstances where the accused does not have the ability to make full answer and defence for himself in his trial.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                    Thomas Richard Nelson

                                                                                                v. (26130)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Defences - Self-defence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that the trial judge did not err in failing to direct the jury to assess the Applicant’s defence of self-defence by the standard of a reasonable person with the diminished intelligence of the Applicant.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Robert J. McMynn

v. (26242)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

AND BETWEEN:

Joanne J. McMynn

v. (26243)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether buses owned by the Applicants who, in their personal capacities, are in the business of leasing out buses, come within the statutory definition of “qualified transportation equipment”, so as to qualify for refundable investment tax credits and deductions under section 127  of the Income Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.) c. 1  - Meaning of “principal business is passenger, property or passenger and property transport”.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

July 22, 1994

Tax Court of Canada (Rowe J.)

Applicants’ appeals from assessments for the  years 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 allowed; assessments referred back to the Minister of National Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment

May 30, 1997

Federal Court of Appeal

(Marceau, Linden and Robertson JJ.A.)

Appeal allowed; Decision of Tax Court is set aside and the assessments of the Minister of National Revenue for the years 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1988 is affirmed

June 16, 1997

Tax Court of Canada (Rowe J.)

Amended judgment: Appeal from the assessments is dismissed

October 2, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

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

                                                            Charles D. Lienaux and Karen L. Turner-Lienaux

                                                                                                v. (26171)

                                                   Wesley G. Campbell and The Toronto-Dominion Bank (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Civil Procedure - Motion to strike out statement of claim - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there was no abuse of process.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION -- REHEARING

DEMANDE DE RÉEXAMEN -- NOUVELLE AUDITION

CORAM: Gonthier, Major and Bastarache JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Bastarache

Alexander Flint McLellan v. Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(Man.)(25840)

DECEMBER 30, 1997 / LE 30 DÉCEMBRE 1997

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Cory et McLachlin

                                                                                               Mary Sauve

                                                                                                v. (26262)

                                                                                     Ivan J. Pokorny (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Civil procedure - Trial - Evidence - Torts - Civil jury trial - Fresh Evidence - When should the Court replace a juror who has been discharged from a civil jury trial - Burden of proving informed consent for elective surgery - Causation - Admission of fresh evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                            Board of School Trustees of School District No.46 (Sunshine Coast)

                                                                                                v. (26204)

Sunshine Coast Teachers’ Association, Carl Robert Bjornson and

British Columbia Labour Relations Board (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Judicial review - Labour law - Arbitration - Teacher dismissed for sexual harassment of female students - Arbitration board upholding dismissal - Labour Relations Board decision sending matter back for rehearing on grounds that Arbitration board had failed to apply correct standard of proof to the evidence - On application for judicial review, arbitration award restored - Chambers judge finding that Labour Relations Board had exceeded its jurisdiction and substituted its own version of the facts - Court of Appeal overturning judgement, and restoring decision of Labour Relations Board to send matter back for rehearing - Labour Relations Code, S.B.C. 1992, ch. 82, Index chap 212.5. - Whether a tribunal, exercising a limited power of review granted by statute can, without evidence, set aside the findings of fact of an arbitration board, merely by analysing the arbitration board’s description in its award of how it weighed the evidence - What standard of review should be applied by the Court on an application for judicial review of the Labour Relations Board, when it is acting as an intermediate tribunal, itself exercising a review jurisdiction.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                              The Minister of Health and Community Services

                                                                                                v. (26321)

                                                                                       M.L. and R.L. (N.B.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Custody - Adoption - Access - After an order of guardianship is granted, are rights of access the right of the parent, or the right of the child - Whether it was in the best interests of the children for their natural parents to be allowed access to them - Whether the appellate court erred in substituting its discretion for that of the trial judge.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                              George Fras

                                                                                                v. (26284)

Maria Jurkojc, Cathy Jurkojc and Anna Jurkojc by their Litigation Guardian, Carolyn V. Amendola,

Aniela Jurkojc, Jan Jurkojc, Barbara Jurkojc and Anna Jurkojc (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Limitation of Actions - prescription - Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.F-3 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in reviewing the chambers judge’s exercise of discretion - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that no prejudice had been suffered by the Applicant.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                     Vacation Brokers Inc.

                                                                                                v. (26306)

                                                                                 Alan Hills Patterson (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

International law - Procedural law - Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments (U.K.) Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.R-6 and the Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, set out as a Schedule to that act - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario correctly allowed the registration of a United Kingdom order for enforcement in Ontario.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache JJ. /

Les juges Iacobucci, Major et Bastarache

                                                                                         Dennis W. Foster

                                                                                                v. (25058)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal granted the Applicant leave to appeal to this Court.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Reva Schafer, Eli Schafer, a Minor by his Litigation Guardian, Reva Schafer,

Linda Shub and Mitchell Shub, a Minor by his Litigation Guardian, Linda Shub

v. (26246)

Attorney General of Canada (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Civil - Unemployment Insurance Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. U-1, ss. 11(3)(a) and (4)(a) - Whether the distinctions drawn between adoptive and biological families by these sections are contrary to s. 15(1)  of the Charter  - Whether the effect of these sections on adoptive children is contrary to s. 15(1)  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                          London Salvage & Trading Co. Ltd.

                                                                                                v. (26241)

                                                                         Sunoco Inc. and SNC/FW Ltd. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Contracts - Acceptance of bids - Deemed acceptance by failure to promptly reject all or part of an offer to purchase - Whether the Court of Appeal failed to find that deemed acceptance of a bid in its entirety can be based on the absence of a prompt rejection of any part of the bid.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JANUARY 8, 1998 / LE 8 JANVIER 1998

26244                    L.K., J.H., AND M.P. - v. - THE CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF OTTAWA-CARLETON AND THE CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF LANARK COUNTY (Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin 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

Family law - Infants - Child protection proceedings -Applicant mother leaving her three children with babysitters in 1991- Applicant mother incarcerated for several months in England delaying her return - Children placed by Respondent with maternal aunt - Eldest child disclosing sexual abuse by mother’s common law husband to maternal aunt - Applicant mother not acknowledging abuse occurred - Applicant mother continuing to reside with common law spouse - Children found in need of protection - Children continuing to reside with maternal aunt - Order for Crown wardship with no access to biological parents - Procedural law  - Trial - Whether adjudication of protection application has been heard - Whether trial judges heard all of the witnesses - Whether trial judge relied on untested perjured testimony - Whether expert testimony given on the contamination of the children in the videos - Whether children should have been assessed by a risk assessment team in accordance with current practice - Whether the Applicants have been found to be child abusers without facts - Whether order of Cousineau J. was valid - Whether Cousineau J. erred in failing to adjourn trial for impending birth of Applicant’s child - Whether counsel for Official Guardian improperly gave submissions to the court - Whether Blishen J. acted without jurisdiction in holding a status review hearing concerning the children as there had been no prior adjudication that the children were in need of protection - Whether the evidence supported the findings of the trial judge - Whether issues raised are of public importance.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26132                    DELROY CAIN - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

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

La demande de présentation de nouveaux éléments de preuve est rejetée. La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Fresh evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying the common law criteria for the admission of fresh evidence pursuant to section 683(1)  of the Criminal Code  strictly and dismissing an application to admit fresh evidence when the subject-matter of that application was expert opinion evidence - Whether the common law criteria for the admission of fresh evidence pursuant to s. 683(1)  of the Criminal Code  is consistent with ss. 7  and 11(d)  of the Charter  - Consciousness of guilt - Whether the trial judge erred in failing to instruct the jury that they could use the Applicant’s statements to the police as evidence of consciousness of guilt only if they were satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that they were lies told for the purpose of concealing guilt.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26279                    J.L.-J.E. - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Alta.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin 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 - Young Offenders - Transfer to ordinary court - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their appreciation and understanding of the recent legislative changes to the punishment provisions for second degree murder in both the Criminal Code  and Young Offenders Act - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their appreciation and understanding of the burden of proof and standard of proof in a transfer application for a young person who is less than 16 years of age and charged with murder.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26205                    FERDINAND VIDAL c. SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE  (Crim.)(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 criminel - Procès - Preuve - Abus de procédures - Éléments de preuve inadmissibles remis par erreur au jury - Est-ce que la tenue d’un troisième procès occasionné uniquement et spécifiquement par la conduite blâmable de la poursuite dans la conduite des procédures équivaut à un abus de procédures ? - Est-ce que le cas soumis sous l’étude constitue un “cas des plus manifestes” pour l’application du pouvoir discrétionnaire de cette Cour ? - Est-ce que l’intérêt supérieur du public et de la justice exige que cette Honorable Cour détermine si la tenue d’un troisième procès occasionné uniquement par la conduite blâmable de la poursuite dans l’administration de sa preuve constitue un abus de procédures?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

26079               CLAUDETTE BASTINGS-ALLARD, JEANNINE BASTINGS-PLANTE ET JEAN BASTINGS c. ANDRÉA BASTINGS, FERNAND BASTINGS ET FLORENT BASTINGS  (Qué.)

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

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

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit des biens - Testaments - Preuve - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle outrepassé les limites de sa compétence et commis une erreur fondamentale en substituant sa propre appréciation des faits et de la crédibilité des témoins à celle adoptée par le premier juge? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle commis plusieurs erreurs manifestes et déterminantes dans sa propre appréciation des faits et de la crédibilité des témoins entendus en première instance? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle violé un principe de justice naturelle en omettant de se prononcer sur la preuve de captation offerte en première instance?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

26154               DAME CHANTAL DESCHAMPS c. LE PROCUREUR GÉNÉRAL DU CANADA  (C.A.F.)(Qué.)

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

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

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Assurance-chômage - Poste de professeur régulier refusé sans droit à la demanderesse - L’indemnité représentant deux ans de salaire que la demanderesse a reçue doit-elle être considérée comme un revenu provenant d’un emploi et répartie selon les articles 57 et 58 du Règlement sur l’assurance-chômage, C.R.C. ch. 1576,? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle commis une erreur en accueillant l’appel de l’intimé et en rétablissant la décision du Conseil arbitral?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

26158                    LAURENT BRODEUR INC. c. LE PROCUREUR GÉNÉRAL DU QUÉBEC (Qué.)

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

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

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Code civil - Responsabilité civile - Dommages-intérêts - Expropriation - Transaction au sens de l’article 1980 du Code civil du Québec - Action en dommages-intérêts de la demanderesse fondée sur l’art. 407 C.c.B.-C. et les art. 6, 24 et 49 de la Charte québécoise rejetée - Appel rejeté - La fermeture des installations minières de Sidbec Normines Inc. suivie de la fermeture de la ville de Gagnon ont-elles créé une situation assimilable à une quasi-expropriation qui oblige le procureur général du Québec à indemniser la demanderesse, propriétaire à l’époque d’un centre d’achats dans la ville de Gagnon?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

26231                    SHIN YEE SHENG BOTH PERSONALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED YEM MOY YEN v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, AND ALSO AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH, DR. DOUG BAGGS, and DR. P.J. RAMPHAL  (Ont.)

CORAM:               Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache 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 - Rule 20 of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure - Motion for summary judgment - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to find that the Applicant raised a triable issue.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

July 30, 1996

Ontario Court of Justice (General Division)

(Hawkins J.)

Respondents’, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario and Dr. P.J. Ramphal, motion for summary judgment granted; Applicant’s action dismissed

September 4, 1997

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Austin, Moldaver, Goudge JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

September 29, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

26276               JOHN DOUGLAS COUSINS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Nfld.)

CORAM:           Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Charge to the jury - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in permitting the Crown to change its theory of liability on appeal - Whether the trial judge ought to have instructed the jury on the application of s. 21 (parties to an offence) even if the Crown did not raise it.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26214               GUARDIAN INSURANCE CO. OF CANADA v. GARRY BRENT MILLER (Alta.)

CORAM:           Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache 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 - Agency - Insurance - Contracts - Vicarious liability - Vicarious liability of an insurer for the negligent failure of an independent insurance agent to procure the insurance coverage requested or reasonably required by the client.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26234               JOHN EDWARD DIXON v. THE GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL  (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

CORAM:           Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache 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

Administrative law ‐ Public inquiries under Part I of the Inquiries Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.I‐11  ‐ Whether federal commissions of inquiry are independent, and if so, what is the source, nature and extent of that independence?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26259                    ELI LILLY AND CO. v. APOTEX INC.  (F.C.A.) (Ont.)

CORAM:           Iacobucci, Major and Bastarache 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 - Patents - Interpretation - Statutory instruments - Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133, s.6 - Whether the prohibition order issued by McGillis J. on February 9, 1995 restrained the Minister from issuing a Notice of Compliance in respect of the same patents based on a Notice of Allegation setting out essentially different grounds than did the Notice of Allegation before McGillis J.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26106                    JOSEPHAKIS CHARALAMBOUS - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and Cory and McLachlin JJ.

The application for reconsideration of the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La requête visant à obtenir le réexamen de la demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

25796                    TITUS NGUIAGAIN c. LE FONDS POUR LA FORMATION DES CHERCHEURS ET L’AIDE À LA RECHERCHE et LA COMMISSION DE LA FONCTION PUBLIQUE ET Me JEAN-PAUL ROBERGE - et entre- TITUS NGUIAGAIN c. LE FONDS POUR LA FORMATION DES CHERCHEURS ET L’AIDE À LA RECHERCHE et BUREAU DU COMMISSAIRE GÉNÉRAL DU TRAVAIL, Me ROBERT LEVAC ET F.P.P.U.-C.E.Q. (Qué.)

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

La demande de réexamen de la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens.

The motion for reconsideration of the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

16.12.1997

Before / Devant: BASTARACHE J.

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

Ilona Kovacs et al.

    v. (26213)

Gwartzman’s Art Supplies et al. (Ont.)

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

DISMISSED / REJETÉE   

17.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Gordon Garland

    v. (25644)

The Consumers’ Gas Co. Ltd. (Ont.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to December 23, 1997.

18.12.1997

Before / Devant: BASTARACHE J.

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

Warren J.M. Yake

   v. (26360)

The Law Society of Alberta (Alta.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour obtenir l’autorisation d’appel

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to January 7, 1998.

18.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union

    v. (25366)

Battlefords and District Co-operative (Sask.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier le mémoire de l’appelante

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to Sept. 11, 1997.

18.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union

    v. (25356)

Canada Safeway Ltd. (Sask.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier le mémoire de l’appelante

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to Sept. 11, 1997.

18.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Thomas Nelson

    v. (26130)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to December 2, 1997.

17.12.1997

Before / Devant:   LE JUGE EN CHEF LAMER

Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

Gaetan Delisle

    c. (25926)

The Attorney General of Canada (Qué.)

Motion to state a constitutional question

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

(1)  Do s. 6 (formerly 109(4)) of the Canada Labour Code and para. (e) of the definition of «employee» at s. 2 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act infringe or deny the appellant’s freedom of expression guaranteed in s. 2( b )  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

(2) Do s. 6 (formerly 109(4)) of the Canada Labour Code and para. (e) of the definition of «employee» at s. 2 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act infringe or deny the appellant’s freedom of association guaranteed in s. 2( d )  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

(3)  Do s. 6 (formerly 109(4)) of the Canada Labour Code and para. (e) of the definition of «employee» at s. 2 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act infringe upon the appellant’s equality rights guaranteed in s. 15(1)  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

(4)  If the answer to questions 1, 2 or 3 is in the affirmative, can s. 6 (formerly 109(4)) of the Canada Labour Code and para. (e) of the definition of «employee» at s. 2 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act be justified under s. 1  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

(1) L’article 6 (auparavant le par. 109(4)) du Code canadien du travail et l’al. e) de la définition de «fonctionnaire» figurant à l’art. 2 de la Loi sur les relations de travail dans la fonction publique portent-ils atteinte à la liberté d’expression garantie à l’appelant par l’al. 2 b )  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libert é s ?

(2) L’article 6 (auparavant le par. 109(4)) du Code canadien du travail et l’al. e) de la définition de «fonctionnaire» figurant à l’art. 2 de la Loi sur les relations de travail dans la fonction publique portent-ils atteinte à la liberté d’association garantie à l’appelant par l’al. 2 d )  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libert é s ?

(3) L’article 6 (auparavant le par. 109(4)) du Code canadien du travail et l’al. e) de la définition de «fonctionnaire» figurant à l’art. 2 de la Loi sur les relations de travail dans la fonction publique portent-ils atteinte aux droits à l’égalité garantis à l’appelant par le par. 15(1)  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libert é s ?

(4) En cas de réponse affirmative aux première, deuxième ou troisième questions, l’art. 6 (auparavant le par. 109(4)) du Code canadien du travail et l’al. e) de la définition de «fonctionnaire» figurant à l’art. 2 de la Loi sur les relations de travail dans la fonction publique peuvent-ils être justifiés au sens de l’article premier de la Charte canadienne des droits et libert é s ?

18.12.1997

Before / Devant:   BASTARACHE J.

Hearing of miscellaneous motion rule 51.1

Peter Lo

    v. (24928)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Audience sur autre requête (règle 51.1)

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

WHEREAS the Registrar has applied for an order under Rule 51.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada;

AND WHEREAS notice of the application has been served by registered mail on the parties;

AND WHEREAS the Applicant made no submissions in response to the notice under Rule 51.1 within seven days after service of the notice, although he was duly served therewith;

AND HAVING read the notice of the Registrar and the response of the Respondent Crown thereto;

BY VIRTUE of the authority given to the Court pursuant to Rule 51.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that these proceedings are stayed and the Applicant is barred from filing further proceedings in this matter.

19.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Dr. Ismail Abrahams

    v. (26224)

Holly Elaine Scott (B.C.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to December 12, 1997.

19.12.1997

Before / Devant:    LE REGISTRAIRE

Motion to extend the time in which to file the respondent’s response and for substitutional service

Claude Deslauriers

    c. (26301)

Ordre des Arpenteurs-Géomètre du Québec et al. (Qué.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour déposer la réponse de l’intimé et requête en substitution de signification

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

19.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Douglas Earl Guyatt

    v. (26332)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to January 19, 1998.

19.12.1997

Before / Devant:   LE JUGE BASTARACHE

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

Giuseppe Sansaloni et al.

    c. (26361)

Ville de Montréal (Qué.)

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

Avec le consentement des parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 30 janvier 1998.

22.12.1997

Before / Devant:   BASTARACHE J.

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

Gordon Wardell Washington

    v. (26366)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to January 26, 1998.

22.12.1997

Before / Devant:   BASTARACHE J.

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

Gordon Thompson

    v. (26366)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to January 26, 1998.

23.12.1997

Before / Devant:   CORY J.

Motion for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Mr. Kenneth Samuel Cromie, on behalf of the Queen Street Patients’ Council

IN/DANS:              Joseph Ronald Winko

v. (25856)

The Director, Forensic Psychiatric Institute et al. (B.C.)

Requête en autorisation d’intervention

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

The application of Kenneth Samual Cromie, on behalf of the Queen Street Patients’ Council for an extension of time and for leave to intervene is granted.   A factum not to exceed 20 pages and avoiding repetition or duplication of other factums may be filed.  Oral argument may be presented which is not to exceed 10 minutes.

At this late stage it would not be fair to the other parties to permit the applicant to supplement the record by filing a brief of social science literature and that request is denied.

19.12.1997

Before / Devant:   CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER

Motion to state a constitutional question

Dennis David Wilson

    v. (25970)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

(1)  Are the privacy rights of the adopted child and of the adoptive parents as set out in sections 13.6, 14 and 15 of the Adoption Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 4 constitutionally inapplicable to the extent that they deny an accused access to records and thereby DNA analysis to refute an allegation of paternity or maternity against him or her, in that they thereby infringe or deny the right to make full answer and defence guaranteed by section 7  of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?

(1)  Les droits relatifs au respect de la vie privée de l’enfant adopté et des parents adoptifs énoncés aux articles 13.6, 14 et 15 de l’Adoption Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, ch. 4, sont-ils constitutionnellement inapplicables dans la mesure où ils empêchent l’accusé(e) d’avoir accès aux dossiers et par conséquent à l’analyse de l’ADN pour réfuter une allégation de paternité ou de maternité faite à son égard, ce qui porterait atteinte au droit de présenter une défense pleine et entière garanti par l’article 7  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés ?

(2)  If so, whether such infringement or denial is justified pursuant to section 1  of the Constitution Act ,  1982 ?

(2)  Dans l’affirmative, cette atteinte est-elle justifiée par l’article premier de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1982 ?

30.12.1997

Before / Devant:   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

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

M.A.G.

   v. (26255)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to December 29, 1997.

6.1.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Doris Bekoe

    v. (25615)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to December 23, 1997.

8.1.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Her Majesty The Queen

    v. (25931)

Patrick Arnold MacDougall (P.E.I.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to February 6, 1998.

8.1.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Her Majesty The Queen

    v. (25922)

Cory Anthony Gallant (P.E.I.)

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

With the consent of the parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to February 6, 1998.

12.1.1998

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Jeffrey Rose

    v. (25448)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to December 8, 1997.

13.1.1998

Before / Devant: LE REGISTRAIRE

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

Sébastien Daigle

    c. (26168)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

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

Avec le consentement des parties.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Délai prorogé au 27 février 1998.

16.12.1997

Cynthia Dobson

   v. (26152)

Ryan Leigh MacLean Dobson by his Litigation Guardian, Gerald M. Price (N.B.)

17.12.1997

Her Majesty The Queen

     v. (26161)

John Sundown (Sask.)

22.12.1997

Sa Majesté La Reine

    c. (25858)

Edmon Kabbabe (Qué.)

BY/PAR:                Attorney General of Alberta

Procureur général du Québec

Attorney General of Saskatchewan

IN/DANS:              Marie Sarah Eurig

v. (25866)

The Registrar of the Ontario Court (General Division) et al. (Ont.)

BY/PAR:                Attorney General of British Columbia

Attorney General of Newfounland

IN/DANS:              The Minister of Finance for the province of New Brunswick et al.

v. (25427)

Union of New Brunswick Indians et al. (N.B.)

AGENDA for the week beginning January 19, 1998.

ORDRE DU JOUR pour la semaine commençant le 19 janvier 1998.