Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

October 6, 2000  1592 - 1742 (INDEX)                                                 le 6 octobre 2000

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

N.M.P.

Roger A. Burrill

Nova Scotia Legal Aid

v. (27936)

Her Majesty the Queen (N.S.)

James A. Gumpert, Q.C.

A.G. of Nova Scotia

FILING DATE 14.9.2000

Claudio Zanchettin, ès qualités de tuteur à son fils Daniel Zanchettin

Jean-Pierre Ménard

Ménard, Martin Avocats

c. (28087)

René Demontigny (Qué.)

John I.S. Nicholl

Nicholl, Paskell-Mede

FILING DATE 24.8.2000

Roy Yaworowski

Roy Yaworowski

v. (28089)

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

FILING DATE 30.8.2000

Roderick MacDonell

Mark Bantey

Gowling Lafleur Henderson, s.r.l.

c. (28092)

Procureur général du Québec et al. (Qué.)

Claude Bouchard

Saint-Laurent, Gagnon

DATE DE PRODUCTION 30.8.2000

The Corporation of the City of Thunder Bay

Stephen J. Wojciechowski

Eryou Barristers LLP

v. (28096)

Barbara Larson (Ont.)

Michael Burgar

Enfield, Adair, Wood, Lichty & McEwen

FILING DATE 30.8.2000

Greyhound Canada Transportation Corp.

Peter G. Altridge

Altridge & Company

v. (28097)

Mariusz Brzozowski, et al. (B.C.)

Brent J. Kitzke

Stevenson Doell & Company

FILING DATE 30.8.2000

Aimé Vachon

François Boisjoli

Savard, Nadeau, Kallis & Associés

c. (28098)

Commission des lésions professionnelles et al. (Qué.)

Claude Verge

Levasseur, Verge

DATE DE PRODUCTION 30.8.2000

Canada Post Corporation

Roy C. Filion, Q.C.

Filion, Wakely & Thorup

v. (28099)

Canadian Union of Postal Workers (N.S.)

Raymond F. Larkin, Q.C.

Pink Breen Larkin

FILING DATE 30.8.2000

General Motors du Canada Limitée

André Leduc

c. (28101)

Serge Desrivières et al. (Qué.)

Laurent Roy

Trudel Nadeau

DATE DE PRODUCTION 31.8.2000

Art Klapstein et al.

Gordon R. McKenzie

Bishop & McKenzie

v. (28102)

Alberta Mortgage and Housing Corporation et al. (Alta.)

Richard J. Cotter, Q.C.

Fraser Milner Casgrain

FILING DATE 5.9.2000

Workers’ Compensation Board of British Columbia

Scott A. Nielsen

Workers’ Compensation Board of B.C.

v. (28103)

Northern Mountain Helicopters Inc. et al. (B.C.)

Arthur M. Grant

Grant Kovacs Norell

FILING DATE 31.8.2000

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW - Canada)

Judith L. Allen

Raven, Allen Cameron & Ballantyne

v. (28105)

Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada et al. (Ont.)

Christopher G. Riggs, Q.C.

Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie

FILING DATE 1.9.2000

Berta Anne Haley

Ronald G. Gates

Gates & Company

v. (28106)

David Allen Thompson (Sask.)

G. Kuse

Cullenaere Kendall Katzman & Richards

FILING DATE 5.9.2000

Beverly Hoover, et al.

Michael S. Teitelbaum

Hughes, Amys

v. (28108)

John Edwards, et al. (Ont.)

David E. Wires

McCague Wires Peacock Borlack McInnis & Lloyd

FILING DATE 5.9.2000

and

John Edwards et al.

David E. Wires

McCague Wires Peacock Borlack McInnis & Lloyd

v. (28108)

The Law Society of Upper Canada et al. (Ont.)

W. Ross Murray, Q.C.

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

FILING DATE   1.9.2000

Hazel Jacko

Alan D. Hunter, Q.C.

Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP

v. (28109)

Her Majesty the Queen (Alta.)

Wesley W. Smart

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 5.9.2000

M.T.

Louise Lachance

c. (28110)

Réjean Dubé, directeur de la protection de la jeunesse du centre jeunesse de l’Estrie (Qué.)

Monique Lavallée

Allaire & Chiasson

DATE DE PRODUCTION 6.9.2000

Dr. Ranjit Perera

Ranjit Perera Ph.D.

v. (28114)

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

David Sgayias, Q.C.

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 7.9.2000

Assiniboine South Teachers’ Association of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society

Mel Myers, Q.C.

Myers Weinberg Kussin Weinstein Pollack

v. (28115)

Assiniboine South School Division No. 3 (Man.)

Robert Simpson

Fillmore Riley

FILING DATE 11.9.2000

Presteve Foods Limited et al.

Paul Burstein

v. (28119)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 12.9.2000

Jesus Angel Alvarez

Jesus Angel Alvarez

v. (28120)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

Marian K. Brown

A.G. of British Columbia

FILING DATE 13.9.2000

Nataly Perron

Nataly Perron

c. (28121)

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

Sophie-Lyne Lefebvre

P.G. du Canada

DATE DE PRODUCTION 13.9.2000

Marc Teahan

Gregory Lafontaine

Lafontaine & Associates

v. (27999)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Leslie Paine

A.G. for Ontario

FILING DATE 18.9.2000

Dezso Kadar

Dezso Kadark

University of Toronto

v. (28018)

Gabriella Kadar (Ont.)

J. Gardner Hodder

Polten & Hodder

FILING DATE 18.9.2000

Kenneth Roydon Hibbert

J.M. Peter Firestone

Firestone & Tyhurst

v. (28021)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

Gil D. McKinnon, Q.C.

A.G. of British Columbia

FILING DATE 26.9.2000

Scarborough Muslim Association

Mohammed Muslim

v. (28123)

Maqbul Hussain et al. (Ont.)

Margaret A. Cowtan

Harvey,  Cowtan

FILING DATE 18.9.2000

Anraj Fish Products Industries Ltd., et al.

George R. Strathy

Strathy & Richardson

v. (28125)

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd. (F.C.A.)

David G. Colford

Brisset Bishop

FILING DATE 15.9.2000

Lyndon and Fran Blacklaws et al.

R. Craig Steele

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

v. (28126)

Sam Morrow et al. (Alta.)

James C. Crawford, Q.C.

McDonald Crawford

FILING DATE 15.9.2000

592123 B.C. Ltd.

Rodney A. Chorneyko

v. (28127)

Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of British Columbia et al. (B.C.)

Robert W. McDiarmid, Q.C.

Morelli, Chertkow

FILING DATE 13.9.2000

Philip Martin Luke

Irwin Koziebrocki

v. (28131)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Kenneth L. Campbell

A.G. for Ontario

FILING DATE 18.9.2000

Metro-Can Construction Ltd.

Joel A. Nitikman

Fraser, Milner, Casgrain

v. (28133)

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

Elizabeth Junkin

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 20.9.2000

Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company

Brian J.E. Brock, Q.C.

Dutton, Brock, MacIntyre & Collier

v. (28134)

Ginger M. Berg, a minor, by her Litigation Guardian, Eleanor S. Berg (Ont.)

J. David Lindsay

Gluckstein & Associates

FILING DATE 20.9.2000

Thomas Richard Jackson

Thomas Richard Jackson

v. (28141)

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

Naomi Goldstein

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 25.9.2000

Henry McAlister Lang

Henry M. Lang, Q.C.

v. (28142)

Yolanda Naccarato (Ont.)

Augusto P. Palombi

Bortolussi & Palombi

FILING DATE 25.9.2000

Shell Oil Company

Elliott M. Myers

Bull, Housser & Tupper

v. (28145)

Jean-Michel Furlan, et al. (B.C.)

James M. Poyner

Poyner Baxter Poyner

FILING DATE 27.9.2000

C.S.

Pierre Fortin

Coté, Desmeules, Fortin

c. (28138)

Linda Goupil, en sa qualité de procureur général du Québec, et al. (Qué.)

Claude Bouchard

St-Laurent, Gagnon

DATE DE PRODUCTION 25.9.2000

SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 / LE 25 SEPTEMBRE 2000

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Major

Hongkong Bank of Canada

v. (27867)

Micron Construction Ltd. (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Negligent misrepresentation - Disclaimers - Bank issuing reference letter to provide comfort to contractors involved in construction project - Letter containing disclaimer - Respondent bringing action against Bank for damages arising from Bank’s alleged negligent misrepresentation - Trial judge granting Bank’s application to have claims dismissed - Court of Appeal allowing Respondent’s appeal and remitting matter to trial court to assess damages - Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that party may be subject to duty of care to avoid making a negligent misrepresentation despite having expressly disclaimed responsibility for that representation - Whether Court of Appeal erred in resolving factual issues not addressed by trial judge where those issues involved analysis of conflicting affidavit evidence and assessment of credibility of deponents.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Zurich Insurance Company

v. (27893)

The Corporation of the City of Dawson Creek (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Multi-peril property insurance -Whether insurance loss predates policy - Arena roof collapsing under heavy snow - Is an insurer, under a policy of property insurance, responsible for a loss which is the ultimate manifestation of a long-term process of physical damage, when that process was initiated prior to that insurer coming on the risk?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel

Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu

v. (27904)

The College of Physicians & Surgeons of Manitoba (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Physicians and surgeons - Findings of professional misconduct against Applicant physician - Whether the hearing held into the Applicant’s conduct satisfied the principals of fundamental justice - Whether the boundary restrictions are so vague that charges of professional misconduct based on them are unsupportable - Whether the College of Physicians & Surgeons has the power to interfere with the personal and social relationships of a physician in the circumstances of this case.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Highland Park Financial Inc., Buhler Industries Inc. and John Buhler

v. (27920)

William Dennis Chalmers and 160475 Canada Limited (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Employment - Creditor and debtor - Summary judgment - Genuine issue for trial - Whether a secured creditor can be held liable for the tort of inducing breach of contract as a result of actions it takes in the course of the lawful enforcement of its rights - Whether a shareholder director, officer or employee of a corporation can be held personally liable for the tort of inducing breach of contract when acting within the scope of his or her authority and without malicious intent.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

Ronald John Baas

v. (27812)

Gail Lorraine Jellema (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Motor Vehicles - Damages - Jury Trial - Whether the court of appeal redefined the role of the medical expert and substantially altered the constraints that have been placed upon the opinions that can be expressed by a medical expert - Whether the court of appeal’s decision allows a medical expert to provide comment or opinions as to the credibility of a party litigant - Whether the court of appeal’s decision sets aside time honoured parameters placed upon medical expert evidence - Whether the decision of the court of appeal disregarded personal bias on the part of a juror as affecting the validity of a jury trial.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

OCTOBER 2, 2000 / LE 2 OCTOBRE 2000

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Major

Dr. Stanley Fred Morrill

v. (27891)

Mervyn Dudley Krangle, an infant by his mother and Guardian ad Litem, Phapphim Krangle, the said Phapphim Krangle and Murray John Krangle (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Statutes- Interpretation - Damages - Wrongful birth - Damages awarded for care of disabled child to age of majority - Contingency damages awarded in the event that the state would not assume financial responsibility for care after age of majority reached - Legislative amendments subsequent to trial extending the definition of “child” - Whether Court of Appeal could consider new definition in assessing the adult plaintiffs’ damage award for the future cost of care of the infant plaintiff after he reaches age 19 - Whether benefits payable under the B.C. Benefits (Income Assistance) Act were to be taken into account in assessing damages for future cost of care - Whether adult plaintiffs have a legal obligation to provide for child’s home care and support beyond the age of 19 - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in interfering with the contingency award made at trial for cost of future care of the infant plaintiff after he reaches age 19.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

May 4, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

Gerald Blerot and Viviane Blerot

v. (27819)

Her Majesty the Queen (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Appeal procedure - Saskatchewan Court of Appeal Rules - Whether Court of Appeal erred in ordering a party not represented by a lawyer to file a factum and an appeal book - Whether Court of Appeal acted contrary to the Court of Appeal Rules.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Her Majesty the Queen and The Minister of National Revenue

v. (28041)

George William Harris on his own behalf, and on behalf of a class of Plaintiffs comprised of all individuals and others required to file returns  pursuant to section 150  of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 c.1 (5th Supp .) as amended, excepting those filers as described in paragraph 2 of this Claim (F.C.A.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Income tax - Procedure - Interpretation - Section 241  of the Income Tax Act  - Action by taxpayer seeking to challenge the particular income tax treatment of another taxpayer - Motion to strike statement of claim - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in overriding and effectively striking down the provision for confidentiality of taxpayer information made in s. 241  of the Income Tax Act  - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in assuming jurisdiction over a matter concerning which the Minister of National Revenue is answerable only to Parliament, thereby failing to respect the separation of powers under the Constitution - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in recognizing that a cause of action lies at the instance of a stranger to review the income tax treatment of a particular taxpayer, when neither the taxpayer nor the Minister of National Revenue and his officials are alleged to have acted fraudulently or in bad faith?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel

Uwe Schweneke

v. (27848)

Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Ontario Ministry of Education, Ministry of Intergovernmental Affairs, Attorney General for Ontario G.R. Taylor, Douglas A. Swackhammer, Graig H. Slater Horst Intscher, Kim Twohig and Alan Wolfish (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Issue estoppel - Whether a claim for constructive dismissal was estopped by previous findings by an Umpire adjudicating an appeal related to a claim for unemployment insurance - Whether defences to the claim for constructive dismissal were estopped by a judgment in a preliminary inquiry.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Robert Hogan, Dorothy Hogan, Denis Burke, Pauline Wiseman, Joyce Swyer, Bryan Blackmore,

Darlene Rideout, Ellen Casey, Mary Parsons, Clara Leonard, William Bowman, Helen Whelan,

Madonna O'Shea, Harold Power, Most Reverend James H. MacDonald, Archbishop of the Archdiocese of

St. John's, Right Reverend Edward J. Bromley, Administrator of the Diocese of Grand Falls, Most

Reverend Raymond J. Lahey, Bishop of the Diocese of St. George's and Most Reverend D. Douglas Crosby

and Bishop of the Diocese of Labrador City‑Schefferville

v. (27865)

Attorney General of Newfoundland and Attorney General of Canada (Nfld.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional Law - Schools - Amendments to the Constitution - Role of plebiscites - Amendment to Term 17 of the Terms of Union between Canada and Newfoundland - Introduction of a single school system regardless of religious affiliation -  Whether protection of minority rights can operate to invalidate a constitutional amendment if governments fail to consult or negotiate with affected minority groups - Whether Constitution entrusts minority rights to the majority or protects rights unless another principle of the Constitution is at risk -  Whether Part V of the Constitution Act,  1982  is a complete code for amendment of the Constitution - Whether spending public funding to support one side of a plebiscite campaign to the exclusion of the other violates a duty of fairness or freedom of expression or equality under the law or freedom of religion - Whether Term 17 of the Terms of Union between Newfoundland with Canada constitutes a provision of the Constitution - Whether a government is under a contractual or fiduciary duty to abide by undertakings given to minorities or others in the course constitutional change or estopped from acting contrary to undertakings - Whether the Constitution Amendment, 1998 amended the Charter - What remedies are available for violations of a duty of fairness, the Charter, or undertakings given to minority groups.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Public Service Alliance of Canada

v. (27901)

The Attorney General of Canada

-and-

 Irène Marinos (F.C.A.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Labour relations - Grievances - Adjudication - Jurisdiction - Judicial review - Standard of review - Respondent Marinos appointed to a correctional officer position for three 90-day periods - Respondent filing grievance following her dismissal - Definition of “employee” in Public Service Staff Relations Act  excluding “a person employed on a casual basis” - Adjudicator finding that Respondent was an “employee” and therefore had the right to present a grievance and refer it to adjudication - Federal Court of Appeal setting aside adjudicator’s decision on basis that she had no jurisdiction to hear the grievance - Whether Respondent “a person employed on a casual basis” - Whether words should be interpreted in light of s. 21.2 of Public Service Employment Act - Public Service Staff Relations Act , R.S.C., 1985, c. P-35, s. 2(1) (g) - Public Service Employment Act , R.S.C., 1985, c. P-33, s. 21.2 .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

Wyn Rhys‑Jones

v. (28017)

Elizabeth Kathleen Rhys‑Jones (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Maintenance - Variation of 1977 support order made under previous divorce legislation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Ontario courts did not have a jurisdiction to hear the Applicant’s application to vary the support order made in favour of the Respondent against the Applicant in divorce proceedings between these parties, pronounced in1977 in the Supreme Court of Ontario pursuant to the 1968 Divorce Act , s. 11(1) .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Thyssen Canada Limited, Securitas Bremer Allgemeine Vers. A.G.

v. (27928)

Mariana Maritime S.A. (F.C.A.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Maritime law - Carriage of goods ‑ Liability for damaged goods ‑ Bill of lading - Charter parties - Incorporation of an arbitration clause - Foreign jurisdiction - Is a third party consignee, or endorsee as holder of a bill of lading, entitled to rely on the bill of lading as containing the entire contract of carriage governing the rights and obligations of the shipowner and the third party holder of the bill of lading pursuant to the Bills of Lading Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. B-5 ? - Is a court permitted to receive additional evidence to vary the terms, or add terms to a bill of lading so as to require a third party consignee, or endorsee of a bill of lading to arbitrate its claim against the shipowner under a Charter Party arbitration clause? - Is a court as a matter of contract, entitled to impose upon a third party consignee, or endorsee of a bill of lading, terms and conditions of a Charter Party to which both the shipowner and the third party bill of lading holder themselves are not parties? - Is a court permitted to interpret the words “Owners” and “Charters” in a Charter Party to which the shipowner and third party consignee, or endorsee of a bill of lading themselves are not parties, to qualify the Charter Party arbitration clause as an “agreement to arbitrate” pursuant to Section 7 of the Commercial Arbitration Code?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Daniel Laplante

v. (27885)

Michel Fortin (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Interpretation - Whether a snowmobile is a motor vehicle within the meaning of s. 224 and Part IV of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8 - Determination of an issue of law before trial pursuant to Rule 21 of the Ontario Rules - Whether the court of appeal erred in finding that a snowmobile is not an “automobile” within the meaning of s. 224 and Part IV of the Insurance Act - Whether the court of appeal erred in finding that the definition of “motor vehicle” in the Highway Traffic Act, which expressly excludes a motorized snow vehicle supported the conclusion that a snowmobile is not encompassed by the phrase “motor vehicle” and hence excluded from the definition of “automobile” found in s. 224(1) of the Insurance Act.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Paul Housen

v. (27826)

Rural Municipality of Shellbrook No. 493 (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Motor vehicles - Highways - Municipal law - Negligence - Liability of rural municipality for failing to post warning signs on local access road - Whether rural municipality has a statutory or common law duty of care to mark a hidden hazards with a road sign where nature and extent of hazard are not apparent to a motorist exercising reasonable care - Whether rural municipality, having made a policy decision to place warning signs of hazards, breached its duty of care to protect those using its roads by failing to implement the policy.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

OCTOBER 5, 2000 / LE 5 OCTOBRE 2000

27856                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN -v.- KAMBIZ MAFI (Crim.) (B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Sentencing - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in principle by applying the 1996 amendments to Part XXIII of the Criminal Code , in particular ss. 718.2(d) and (e), to the discrete sentencing provisions for second degree murder - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in principle by creating a narrowly-defined category of second degree murder for the purpose of determining parole ineligibility and by treating deviation from it as reviewable error - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in principle by determining that deterrence is not served by increasing parole ineligibility beyond 10 years.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27918                    HELMUT JOHANNES MERZ ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Evidence - Hearsay - Threats - Whether Court of Appeal erred with respect to the prejudicial effect of hearsay evidence when applying s. 686(1) (b)(iv) of the Criminal Code , R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46  - Whether a limiting instruction regarding prohibited propensity inference was required in relation to evidence of threats.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27917                    DAVID BEYO ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Uttering threats - Elements of the offence - Lesser included offences.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27878                    GODWIN SMITH ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Procedural law - Assessment - Limitation of actions - Goods and Services Tax - Whether the trial judge erred in law, by not observing the limitation period of the Income Tax Act  and that of the G.S.T.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27777                    BARRIE ROMKEY AND BRIAN ROMKEY ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Income Tax - Income Attribution and Indirect Payments -Trusts - Children’s Trusts - Income Tax Act , R.S.C., 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1 , as amended, s. 74.1(2) - Company declared and paid dividends to the children’s trusts - Minister included the dividends in the Applicants’ respective incomes for the taxation years in question - Whether such dividends are to be included in the Applicants’ income - Whether the court of appeal erred in determining the provisions of subsection 74.2(2) of the Act applied in the circumstances of this case so as to render the Applicants liable to include the dividends in their respective incomes.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27840                    WANXIA LIAO ‑ v. ‑ ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO, DAVID WATERHOUSE (Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the University of Toronto and  David Waterhouse.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de l’Université de Toronto et David Waterhouse.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Claim of discrimination based on race - Equality Rights - Whether the Human Rights Commission erred in deciding not to refer subject to the board of inquiry - Motion to compel Human Rights Commission to file documents - Motion to set aside and/or vary decision on the motion denied at the Superior Court of Justice - Whether Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in not allowing motion to set aside or vary the decision of the Superior Court of Justice.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

June 22, 1999

Ontario Superior Court of Justice

(Matlow J.)

Order to have documentary evidence pertaining to application produced, and then sealed until delivered  to panel hearing application

October 21, 1999

Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Divisional Court)

(O’Driscoll, Paisley and Gillese JJ.)

Applications for adjournment and for an order to  vary order from Matlow J. dismissed

February 14, 2000

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Carthy, Charron and Rosenberg JJ.A.)

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

April 5, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

27601                    JOSEPH WILLIAM HNATIW ‑ v. ‑ HILDA SCRAMSTAD, SHANE MCDONALD, VALERIE MCDONALD, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF CALVIN MCDONALD, LARRY BELL (Sask.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The application for an 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

Torts - Motor Vehicles - Personal injury - Damages - Negligence - Whether the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan erred in rejecting the Applicant’s appeal against a judgment from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Saskatchewan.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27753                    THE GAZETTE, UNE DIVISION DE SOUTHAM INC. ‑ c. ‑ SYNDICAT CANADIEN DES COMMUNICATIONS, DE L'ÉNERGIE ET DU PAPIER, SECTION LOCALE 145, SCEP, RITA BLONDIN, MM. ERIBERTO DI PAOLO, UMED GOHIL, HORACE HOLLOWAY, PIERRE REBETEZ, MICHAEL THOMSON, JOSEPH BRAZEAU, ROBERT DAVIES, JEAN‑PIERRE MARTIN, LESLIE STOCKWELL, MARC TREMBLAY - et - M^E ANDRÉ SYLVESTRE (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache et Arbour.

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

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Convention collective - Arbitrage - Ententes civiles tripartites - Droits acquis - Clause compromissoire - Grief - Droit au lock-out - Processus obligatoire de renouvellement de la convention collective selon l’arbitrage des meilleures offres finales - Un employeur et un syndicat, régis par la législation sur les rapports collectifs du travail au Canada et plus précisément par le Code du travail, peuvent-ils réglementer les conditions de travail des salariés par des ententes civiles assorties de clauses compromissoires parfaites au sens du Code de procédure civile plutôt que par voie de convention collective de travail sanctionnée par la procédure d’arbitrage de griefs? - Des salariés visés par une accréditation syndicale et encore soumis aux vicissitudes de la négociation collective peuvent-ils bénéficier de droits acquis ou immuables au sens de l’arrêt Dayco (Canada) Ltd. c. TCA-Canada, [1993] 2 R.C.S. 230? - Des salariés visés par une accréditation syndicale peuvent-ils obtenir des dommages-intérêts pour un geste posé par leur employeur qui a été jugé conforme à la convention collective par un arbitre de griefs suite à un grief de leur syndicat?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 5 février 1998

Arbitre (Me André Sylvestre)

Mésentente du 8 mai rejetée;

mésentente du 4 juin accueillie

Le 30 octobre 1998

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

Requête en révision judiciaire de la demanderesse accueillie

Le 15 décembre 1999

Cour d'appel du Québec

(Rousseau‑Houle, Chamberland, et  Forget jj.c.a)

Appel accueilli en partie

Le 11 février 2000

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d'autorisation d'appel déposée

27679                    DRAGISA GAJIC ‑ v. ‑ WOLVERTON SECURITIES LTD. AND MARK FRANK WOLVERTON (B.C.)

CORAM:               L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache and LeBel 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 - Irregular statement of claim - Right to be heard - Did the Court of Appeal err in negligence on the part of the Respondents? - Did the Court of Appeal err in law of fact in a real issue of contract? - Did the Court of Appeal err in not considering the rules and regulations of the Vancouver Stock Exchange and the B.C. Securities Commission?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27908                    2953‑6778 QUÉBEC INC. ‑ c. ‑ MICHAEL GALLAGHER, MECAR METAL INC. ET ROSEMEX INC.  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel.

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 commercial - Exécution d’un contrat - Administration de la preuve - Preuve testimoniale du contexte de l’entente admissible - Pas donc nécessaire de qualifier le contexte comme faisant la preuve de la considération, cause, objet ou condition du contrat - La Cour d’appel pouvait-elle autoriser la preuve testimoniale selon les règles de preuve de droit civil pour faire échec au formalisme de l’écrit imposé par l’article 14 de la Loi canadienne sur les sociétés par actions L.R.Q., 1985, c. C-44 à tout contrat conclu au nom d’une société par action avant sa constitution? - Selon les règles de l’administration de la preuve en droit civil, le seul fait de poser une question sur le contexte des négociations d’un contrat écrit donne-t-il ouverture à toute preuve testimoniale de nature à contredire l’écrit?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27882                    M^E FERNAND CÔTÉ, ÈS QUALITÉS DE COMMISSAIRE À LA DÉONTOLOGIE POLICIÈRE ‑ c. ‑ RÉNALD TAILLEFER  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel.

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 - Appel - Retenue judiciaire - Crédibilité des témoins - Position privilégiée du juge des faits - Clause privative - Erreur claire et identifiable - Substitution d’opinion non motivée - Le principe de la retenue judiciaire que doit observer une cour d’appel s’applique-t-il à titre de règle de droit au sens de l’arrêt Hodgkinson c. Simms, [1994] 3 R.C.S. 377 en droit administratif canadien? - La règle de justification des jugements énoncés dans l’arrêt R. c. Burns, [1994] 1 R.C.S. 656 constitue-t-elle une règle de droit? - Les juges majoritaires de la cour d’appel siégeant en appel d’un jugement de la Cour supérieure en révision judiciaire se sont-ils accordés une compétence qu’ils n’avaient pas en se substituant à la première cour d’appel dont le jugement avait été invalidé par la Cour supérieure? - Article 146 de la Loi sur l’organisation policière.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 7 octobre 1992

Comité de déontologie policière

(MM. Mignault, Groulx et Hyppolite)

Décision: l’intimé a commis des actes dérogatoires

27808                    ANDRÉ LEDOUX ‑ c. ‑ SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE  (C.A.F.)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel.

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 fiscal - Droit commercial - Vente - Revenu d’entreprise - Montage fiscal - Sociétés en commandite - Trompe-l’oeil - Prix de vente réel - Prélèvements - Mention «in trust» - Validité des offres d’achat et de vente - Droit de planifier ses affaires afin de réduire sa charge fiscale - La Cour canadienne de l’impôt a-t-elle mis de côté les règles fondamentales du droit civil du Québec en matière de validité des contrats?  

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27971                    RONY ALEXANDER LOPEZ ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (N.B.)

CORAM:               L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache and LeBel JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Evidence - Whether judge entitled to view videotape properly admitted into evidence at slow motion during deliberations.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27813                    BARRY ROBERT MORRISON ‑ v. ‑ THE SOCIETY OF LLOYD'S (N.B.)

CORAM:               L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache and LeBel 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

International law - Conflict of laws - Contracts- Choice of jurisdiction - Choice of law - Public policy - Securities law - Whether a party who solicits investments in Canadian capital markets in violation of provincial securities laws can escape civil sanction under Canadian law by incorporating a choice of court and choice of law clause in favour of foreign courts and foreign laws into its investment contracts - Whether a choice of law and choice of court clause should be given effect where the plaintiff alleges that he is the victim of an antecedent fraudulent scheme on the part of the drafter and beneficiary of the clauses ?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27815                    THOMAS BLAIR DRUMMIE ‑ v. ‑ THE SOCIETY OF LLOYD'S (N.B.)

CORAM:               L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache and LeBel 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

International law - Conflict of laws - Contracts - Choice of jurisdiction - Choice of law - Securities law - Tort - Fraudulent misrepresentation - Forum non conveniens - Procedural Law - Appeal - Constitution of panel - Whether the Applicant’s case was brought before the New Brunswick Court of Appeal in accordance with the provisions of section 8 of the Judicature Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. J-2 - Whether the Applicant was deprived of the opportunity to have his appeal heard before a properly constituted panel of the Court of Appeal - Whether the New Brunswick Court of Appeal erred in law in upholding the Motions Judge’s imposition of a stay of the Applicant’s action against the Respondent?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27924                    VILLE DE CHAMBLY ‑ c. ‑ LINE DICAIRE ET JEAN‑LUC LEDUC  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel.

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

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Recours collectif - Autorisation - Questions identiques, similaires ou connexes - Représentation du groupe - Inondations - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle respecté le principe de non-intervention quant à la conclusion atteinte par le juge de première instance? - Les faits allégués paraissent-ils justifier les conclusions recherchées? - Les intimés ont-ils la qualité requise pour assumer le statut de représentant et assurer une représentation adéquate des membres? - Les questions de fait ou de droit soulevées par les différents membres du groupe sont-elles identiques, similaires ou connexes? - La cohérence des décisions des tribunaux a-t-elle été respectée? - La demande rencontre-t-elle la notion d’intérêt national?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27842                    DAVID KARL LANSDOWNE, THE CONSORTIUM GROUP LIMITED ‑ v. ‑ PENSA & ASSOCIATES (Ont.)

CORAM:               L'Heureux‑Dubé, Bastarache and LeBel 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 - Pre-trial procedure - Motion to expunge new evidence from motion record - Motion to adduce new evidence - Whether the material submitted to the Appeal Court of Ontario was incomplete - Whether Appeal Court of Ontario erred in not providing reasons in writing for dismissal of appeal - Whether Appeal Court of Ontario erred in not deciding to adduce “Fresh Evidence”.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27899                    PAUL MacINNES  ‑ v. ‑  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN  (Crim.) (Ont.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal Law - Trial within a reasonable time - Unreasonable delay - Disclosure - Was the applicant’s right to be tried within a reasonable time infringed when for a period of eight (8) months the Kingston Police Force was in contempt of court due to its refusal to comply with the trial court’s disclosure order and when at trial the Crown failed to offer any explanation as to why it took five and a half (5.5) months to provide the applicant with two pages of the arresting officers’ notes, which notes existed on the date of arrest - Whether the onus of proof of dispatch is on the Crown or the applicant - Did the Ontario Court of Appeal err in law in holding that the applicant’s right to be tried within a reasonable period of time had not been infringed due to what it felt was very limited prejudice shown by the applicant at trial - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , s. 11(b) .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 1, 1999

Ontario Court (Provincial Division)

(Pedlar Prov. J.)

Application for stay pursuant to s. 11(b)  of Charter  dismissed

27930                    VOLF FRIEDMAN, BELLA SEYDER and SHNEOR FRIEDMAN, minor  ‑ v. ‑  MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION  (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Immigration - Application for judicial review - Whether the Federal Court, Trial Division failed to observe a principle of natural justice, procedural fairness or other procedure that it was required by law to observe - Whether the Federal Court, Trial Division erred in law in making its decision, whether or not the error appears on the face of record - Whether the Federal Court, Trial Division based its decision on an erroneous finding of the fact that it made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for material before it.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27855                    SUCCESSION DE DAME SYLVIA SCHWARTZ  - c. ‑  DIONYSIA ZERBISIAS  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

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 - Droit commercial - Vente d’un immeuble - «Vice caché» - Risque théorique - Le toit de l’immeuble construit en 1956 et acheté par l’intimée en 1989, était-il affecté d’un vice caché au sens de l’article 1522 du C.c.B.C., soit un vice qui le rendait impropre à l’usage auquel on le destinait ou qui en diminuait de manière importante son utilité au point que l’intimée n’aurait pas acheté l’immeuble ou n’en aurait pas donné si haut prix? -  La Cour d’appel a-t-elle valablement interprété les dispositions de l’article 1522 C.c.B.C. lorsqu’elle conclut que la présence d’un vice de construction joint au risque théorique de condensation en découlant permettent de conclure que l’intimée, eût-elle connu la situation au moment d’acheter l’immeuble, n’en aurait pas donné un si haut prix, alors que la preuve analysée et appréciée par le premier juge démontre que le toit, tel que construit, jouait son rôle de manière efficace et n’avait jamais été source de problèmes? -  La Cour d’appel du Québec pouvait-elle intervenir en l’espèce et ainsi réviser la preuve et l’appréciation des témoignages par le premier juge qui conclut que le vice allégué ne rendait pas la résidence impropre à l’usage auquel on la destinait ou en diminuait l’utilité, sans pour autant identifier l’erreur manifeste d’appréciation prétendument commise? - Art. 1522 Code civil du Bas Canada.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27729                    SALVATORE GRAMAGLIA  ‑ v. ‑  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour 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 - Whether lower courts erred in disposition of Applicant's application for judicial review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27913                    D.C.A.  ‑ v. ‑  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN  (Crim.) (Alta.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Young offenders - Whether the Alberta Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the effect of the failure of the Youth Court to fulfil its mandatory duty pursuant to s. 23(3)(c) of the Young Offenders Act.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27952                    JONATHAN TRELAWNY SILBERNAGEL  ‑ v. ‑  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN  (Crim.) (B.C.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Stare decisis - Whether Court of Appeal erred in denying leave to appeal on the basis that there was no merit to an argument that the applicant was entitled to rely on a decision by a Justice of the Peace available at trial but overruled between trial and appeal - Whether Court of Appeal erred by substituting a question of its own by holding that they would hear an appeal on the constitutionality of photo radar law but not on a question of precedent - Whether it was necessary to follow specified precedent - Whether the conduct of the Crown and the courts constitutes a breach of judicial independence sufficient to warrant granting leave to appeal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 25, 1998

Provincial Court of British Columbia

(Turley J.P.)          

Conviction for speeding; Fine of $100 plus victim surcharge of $15

March 3, 1999

Supreme Court of British Colombia

(Henderson J.)

Summary Conviction Appeal dismissed

February 23, 2000

Court of Appeal of British Columbia

(Hollinrake J.A.)

Application for leave to appeal dismissed

April 3, 2000

Court of Appeal of British Columbia

(Southin, Prowse , Newbury JJ.A.)

Application for review dismissed

June 2, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

27870                    KA LAM LAW, KAM SU CHAN et 2821109 CANADA INC.  - c. ‑  SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE (Crim.) (N.-B.)

CORAM:               Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est accordée avec dépens en faveur des demandeurs quelle que soit l’issue du pourvoi.

The application for leave to appeal is granted with costs to the applicants in any event of the cause.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne  - Droit criminel -  Déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire - Biens volés - Vie privée - Administration de la preuve -  Requête de l’intimée demandant que les photocopies des documents trouvés dans un coffre-fort volé soient admises en preuve devant le tribunal à titre de pièce de conviction dans le cadre d’une poursuite en vertu de la Loi sur la taxe d’accise , L.R.C., 1985, c. E-15  - Preuve non reliée à l’enquête sur le crime de vol - La preuve est-elle obtenue de façon abusive et déconsidère-t-elle l’administration de la justice?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27943                    HARRY WILLIAM KERR  ‑ v. ‑  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN  (Crim.) (B.C.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal Law - Right to Counsel - Right to silence - Trial- Re-examination - Whether Applicant’s rights as guaranteed by Section 10 (b) and 7  of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated when an incriminating statement was obtained from the Applicant by the police approximately 45 minutes subsequent to the police agreeing with counsel retained by the Applicant that the police would not question or interview the Applicant without first contacting such counsel - Whether trial judge erred in refusing to allow Applicant’s counsel to re-examine a defence witness being a psychiatrist, on areas raised by the Crown in cross-examination and not dealt with in examination in chief - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , ss. 7  and 10(b) .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27760                    STECKMAR NATIONAL REALTY INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD., ARTHUR H. STECKLER  - c. ‑  GALERIE MIRABELLE INC.  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

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 commercial - Contrats - Interprétation - Exigibilité d’un paiement - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en ignorant complètement certaines conclusions de faits du premier juge pourtant matérielles à l’issue du litige, la principale étant que l’intimée n’avait gagné aucune somme en vertu des articles 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3 et 3.3.4 de l’Entente? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en substituant son appréciation des faits à celle du premier juge - sans motiver cette intervention - relativement à la qualité de la contribution de l’intimée au projet et plus particulièrement au volet zonage du projet, qualité jugée essentiellement nulle par le juge de première instance, et relativement aux rares démarches effectuées par rapport à l’étendue de ses obligations aux termes de l’Entente?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27859                    AIR WEMINDJI INC.  - v. ‑  HÉLI-FOREX INC. and NATION CRI DE WEMINDJI  (Que.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Code civil - Droit commercial - Créancier et débiteur - Cession de contrat - Mode de paiement - Virement de fonds - Conditions pour avoir un paiement valide - Est-ce que l’art. 1564 C.c.Q. devrait être interprété de façon à requérir le consentement du créancier pour effectuer un paiement par virement de fonds? - Un débiteur devrait-il être libéré de son obligation lorsque le créancier a bénéficié du paiement fait à un tiers? - Art. 1564 du Code civil du Québec - Art. 1144 du Code civil du Bas Canada.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27877                    GILLES LÉTOURNEAU et MARC LAFONTAINE  - c. ‑  LA GARANTIE, COMPAGNIE D’ASSURANCE DE L’AMÉRIQUE DU NORD  (Qué.)

CORAM:               Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

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 - Droit commercial - Cautionnement - Contrats - Vice de consentement - Erreur sur la nature du contrat - Erreur inexcusable - Clause illisible, incompréhensible ou abusive - «Personne raisonnable» - Articles 1400 et 1436 du Code civil du Québec.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27916                    WILFRED E. BEACH, THERESE BEACH and KEITH BEACH  ‑ v. ‑  THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  (Crim.) (Man.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

International law - Criminal law - Evidence - Treaty between Canada and the United States of America provides for mutual legal assistance in criminal matter - Treaty implemented by the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, S.C. 1988, c. 37 - Section 18(1) of that act creates process for gathering evidence in Canada for crimes committed in the United States of America - Whether the purpose and objective of that act allow for an interpretation of the words “reasonable grounds” and “will be found” in s. 18(1) that fails to meet the minimum constitutional threshold guaranteed by ss. 7  and 8  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

March 4, 1999

Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba

(Oliphant A.C.J.Q.B.)

Applicants ordered, ex parte, to be examined under oath and to produce documents to foreign law enforcement authorities pursuant to Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act

May 26, 1999

Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba

(Oliphant A.C.J.Q.B.)

Motion to quash ex parte order and subpoenas issued pursuant to it dismissed

March 20, 2000

Court of Appeal of Manitoba

(Scott C.J.M., Helper and Monnin JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

May 17, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

27806                    WALTER ANTKIW  ‑ v. ‑  SUSAN VERSCHEURE and STEPHEN VERSCHEURE  (Ont.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour 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 - Wills - Revocation - Undue Influence - Child and Elderly Parent - Testator was an uneducated, elderly woman with diminished mental ability, who could not read or write English - Applicant persuaded Testator to destroy will - Testator transferred property to the Applicant without receiving independent legal advice - Whether the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Geffen v. Goodman Estate, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 353 has been inconsistently applied and interpreted by five appellate courts, and whether clarification of that decision is required, particularly where it operates together with other conflicting doctrines, presumptions, and onuses in the same factual context - Whether there is significant disparity in the lower courts’ application and interpretation of the decision in Vout v. Hay, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 876, as it applies to situations where the Geffen v. Goodman Estate presumption also arises - Whether the courts below are inconsistent in their application of provincial statutory requirements of corroborative evidence, where the Geffen v. Goodman Estate and/or Vout v. Hay presumptions also apply - Whether the doctrine of presumption of undue influence as interpreted by the courts below places unreasonable restraints on the freedom to dispose of property by “marginalized” persons in society such as the elderly, the unsophisticated or the poorly educated - Whether there is sufficient doubt as to the correctness of the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario to merit the consideration of the Supreme Court of Canada.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27796                    IOANNIS SARVANIS  ‑ v. ‑  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA  (F.C.A.)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is granted with costs to the applicant in any event of the cause.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est accordée avec dépens en faveur du demandeur quelle que soit l’issue du pourvoi.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Interpretation - Crown liability - Torts - Summary judgment - Crown Liability and Proceedings Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-50, s. 9  - Applicant alleges that he was injured by the negligence of a federal government actor - Applicant in receipt of disability benefits under the Canada Pension Plan - Whether, under the terms of the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act , s. 9 , the payment of disability benefits disallows the Applicant from suing the Crown in tort for the injuries he suffered - Whether summary judgment was properly granted on that ground.