Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

August 25, 2000  1325 - 1439                                                              le 25 août 2000

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Gaston Lebrun

Benoît Turcotte

Therrien, Turcotte

c. (27618)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qué.)

Henri-Pierre Labrie

Procureur général du Québec

DATE DE PRODUCTION 30.3.2000

Paul Kenneth Bernardo

Paul Kenneth Bernardo

v. (27925)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

James A. Ramsay

A.G. for Ontario

FILING DATE 23.5.2000

Her Majesty the Queen

Christopher Webb

A.G. for Ontario

v. (27996)

James Handy (Ont.)

Richard N. Stern

FILING DATE 26.6.2000

Robert Donald VanDenburgh

Robert Donald VanDenburgh

v. (28015)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

W.J. Scott Bell

A.G. of British Columbia

FILING DATE 17.7.2000

Franco Cigana

Franco Cigana

v. (28016)

Regent Millette et al. (Que.)

Regent Millette

FILING DATE 18.7.2000

Wyn Rhys-Jones

Leonard Max, Q.C.

v. (28017)

Elizabeth Kathleen Rhys-Jones (Ont.)

John E. Johnson

Nelligan-Power

FILING DATE 18.7.2000

Corrine Godin

Terrence P. Lenihan

Byrne, Lenihan, Riordon

v. (28019)

Premier Salon International Inc., et al. (N.B.)

Craig J. Carleton

Robichaud, Godin, Williamson, Theriault & Johnstone

FILING DATE 20.7.2000

Les Freeman

Les Freeman

v. (28024)

General Motors Acceptance Corporation of Canada, Limited (Sask.)

Eileen V. Libby

MacPherson Leslie & Tyerman

FILING DATE 26.7.2000

Mil Systems, a division of Davie Industries Inc. et al.

J. Bruce Carr-Harris

Borden Ladner Gervais

v. (28022)

The Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada et al. (F.C.A.)

Michael F. Ciavaglia

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 21.7.2000

Warren Anthony George

Michael Code

Sack Goldblatt Mitchell

v. (28031)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Michael Bernstein

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 2.8.2000

Vincenzo Cipollone

Timothy E. Breen

Fleming, Breen

v. (28035)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Lucy Cecchetto

A.G. for Ontario

FILING DATE 2.8.2000

Nicholas Y. Bonamy

Nicholas Y. Bonamy

v. (28038)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

Kenneth J. Yule, Q.C.

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 8.8.2000

Daniel Gaudreault

Charles Bédard

Martin Tremblay, Mario Bouchard & Assoc.

c. (28040)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qué.)

Claudine Roy

Procureur général du Québec

DATE DE PRODUCTION 3.8.2000

Lauchlin Ronald MacDonald

Nash T. Brogan

Kimball & Associates

v. (28048)

Her Majesty the Queen (N.S.)

James A. Gumpert, Q.C.

Public Prosecutions Service

FILING DATE 9.8.2000

Alexander Jaworski

F. Paul Morrison

McCarthy Tétrault

v. (28052)

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

Robert H. Jaworsky

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 8.8.2000

Glen Ekman

Gil D. McKinnon, Q.C.

v. (28056)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

William F. Ehrcke, Q.C.

A.G. of British Columbia

FILING DATE 10.8.2000

Jacques Robitaille

Jean-Luc Paris

Pasquin & Associés

c. (28061)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qué.)

Guylaine Aspirot

Procureur général du Québec

DATE DE PRODUCTION 15.8.2000

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

J. Brett Ledger

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt, LLP

v. (28020)

Sierra Club of Canada, et al. (F.C.A.)

Timothy J. Howard

FILING DATE 20.7.2000

Peter Fehr

Marcel Jodoin

Smith Neufeld Jodoin

v. (28023)

Roman Brodowski (Man.)

Leonard M. French

Fillmore Riley

FILING DATE 24.7.2000

Clayton Charles Ruby

Clayton C. Ruby

Ruby & Edwardh

v. (28029)

The Solicitor General (F.C.A.)

Barbara McIsaac, Q.C.

McCarthy Tétrault

FILING DATE 28.7.2000

Musqueam Holdings Ltd. et al.

Darrell W. Roberts, Q.C.

Roberts & Baker

v. (28032)

Assessor of Area #09 - Vancouver, et al. (B.C.)

John Savage

Crease Harman & Company

FILING DATE 1.8.2000

Tawich Development Corporation

John Hurley

Fraser Milner Casgrain

v. (28033)

Deputy Minister of Revenue of Quebec (Que.)

Jocelyne Mailloux Martin

Veillette & Associés

FILING DATE 2.8.2000

Robin Edwin Hall

John L. Sinclair

Sinclair & Associates

v. (28034)

Terri Lynn Melna et al. (Man.)

Ken G. Mandzuik

Taylor McCaffrey

FILING DATE 1.8.2000

JULY 24, 2000 / LE 24 JUILLET 2000

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Major

Bank of America Canada

v. (27898)

Clarica Trust Company, Mutual Trustco Inc., Mutual Life of Canada, Raymond Dore, Ian Sutherland, Robert A. Stuebing and S. Scott Cameron (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Procedural Law - Interest - Damages - Breach of contract - Statute - Interpretation - Availability of compound interest on damage awards - Circumstances that a court ought to consider in determining whether compound interest is appropriate - Legal or equitable basis for awarding compound interest  - Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C-43, ss. 128, 129, 130.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Gary Kelemen and Christine Kelemen

v. (27693)

Chawki El‑Homeira and Yolla El‑Homeira (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Deceit - Materiality - Vendor real estate agent providing his co-worker for advice on real estate transaction to purchasers - Do three of the elements that a Plaintiff must prove to support an action in damages for the tort of deceit include material inducement, a false representation of fact and an intention to deceive and does material inducement require a two-part test, the first of which is objective - Has the legislature of the Province of Alberta, as well as many other legislatures in Canada, determined that contributory negligence applies to intentional torts including deceit -  Can a married woman be found guilty of deceit and be liable for damages solely as a result of the fact that she is married to the person who allegedly made the deceitful representation - Do Courts of Appeal in Canada have a positive duty to deal in a meaningful way with substantive and substantial arguments relating to obvious factual errors undermining the trial judgment.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Ivan Vanek, Georgina Vanek and Eva Vanek,

a minor by her litigation guardian, Georgina Vanek

v. (27735)

The Great Atlantic & Pacific Company of Canada Limited and

Beatrice Foods Inc.

 - and -

Fairlee Fruit Juice Ltd. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence -  Duty of care - Foreseeability of nervous shock or mental, emotional and psychological distress - Child swallowing contaminated juice causing parents emotional distress - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario misapplied the legal test of foreseeability as set out in this case - Whether Court of Appeal for Ontario erred at law in interfering with the Trial Judge’s finding of fact, and replacing the Trial Judge’s finding of fact with its own, in the absence of any payable or overriding error on the part of the Trial Judge - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario misapplied and ignored key facts in determining the issue of foreseeability - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in that it applied and followed case law precedent with significantly different facts, and in one case applied and followed the legal test of a foreign jurisdiction with no precedent in Canadian law - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there had been no claim for damages pleaded on behalf of the Plaintiff Georgina Vanek pursuant to the Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Carl Laufer

v. (27761)

John Bucklaschuk (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Libel and slander - Costs - Is a jury in a defamation case, which involves multiple statements, required to answer questions indicating which extended meaning (false innuendo) pleaded by the plaintiff the jury attributes to each of the alleged defamatory statements and which of the statements the jury finds to be defamatory - Is a party who agrees on the form of questions to be put to a jury bound by that agreement or may that party raise as a ground of appeal that the form of questions was inadequate and in error? - Is a trial judge required to instruct the jury on each particular extended meaning (false innuendoes) pleaded by the plaintiff that each of the allegedly defamatory statements could reasonably bear and instruct the jury that it is their responsibility to determine whether each allegedly defamatory statement does in fact bear a particular extended meaning? - When determining whether there is express or actual malice on the part of a defendant on an occasion of qualified privilege, may a jury consider whether the allegedly defamatory statements were made for any indirect motive or purpose other than the honest fulfilment of the duty to communicate the information to the persons concerned and conclude that malice exists - Is it the law in Canada that qualified privilege can only be defeated if the dominant purpose  for publishing the defamatory statements was to injure the plaintiff’s reputation? - Does non-direction to a jury constitute a ground of appeal if no objection is raised at trial by counsel?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Brian J. Stewart

v. (27860)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Interpretation - Taxation - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in applying the “reasonable expectation of profit” test to disallow the deduction of losses of the Applicant arising from investments in real estate where the investments were not acquired for personal use but for the purpose of earning rental income - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to analyse the true issue in this case of whether the interest expenses of the Applicant were deductible pursuant to paragraph 20(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act , S.C. 1970-71 c. 63, as amended.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 17, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada                                    

Application for leave to appeal filed

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27724)

Jack Walls and Robert Buvyer (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Interpretation - Taxation - Whether the reasonable expectation of profit test laid down in Moldowan v. The Queen, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 480 for determining the existence of income under the Act is effectively only applicable in circumstances where there is a personal element to the activity which is under review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel

Nichols Gravel Limited

v. (27720)

The Corporation of the Township of Delhi, David Anderson and Frank Gelinas (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Judgments and orders - Appellate jurisdiction - Torts - Commercial law - Action for injurious falsehood, unlawful interference with economic relations and conspiracy - Punitive damages and equitable relief sought - Action dismissed at trial - Allegation that appeal wrongly heard by Divisional Court on consent of counsel rather than in Court of Appeal - Leave to appeal to Court of Appeal denied - Whether counsel’s consent can confer jurisdiction on a court that would otherwise not be entitled to hear an appeal - Whether any obligation on the Court of Appeal to grant a remedy when presented with a lower court judgment made in the absence of jurisdiction - What principles govern a trial Judge’s assessment under s. 19(1)(a)(iv) of the Courts of Justice Act, for the purposes of determining appellate jurisdiction - Whether an action in negligence lies against a government body that fails to follow its own law governing the award of contracts through a tendering process.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Alan Bromstein

v. (27923)

Michael Khanna (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Pleadings - Motion to strike - Torts - Intentional torts - Prosecutorial immunity -  Statutory immunity - Lawyer acting for Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario in unsuccessful disciplinary proceedings against member who then sues lawyer alleging negligence, malicious prosecution, civil conspiracy, interference with economic relations, and abuse of process - What is the proper interpretation and application of the immunity provision of the Regulated Health Professions Act, S.O. 1991, c. 18 - What are the requirements of pleading malice or bad faith - What are the requirements of pleading the tort of malicious prosecution against a lawyer acting as counsel for the College in a disciplinary proceeding - What are the requirements of pleading the tort of conspiracy against a lawyer acting as counsel for the College in a disciplinary proceeding - Regulated Health Professions Act, S.O. 1991, c. 18, s. 38.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Pierre Devinat

c. (27727)

La Commission de l'immigration et du statut de réfugié (C.A.F.) (Ont.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Mandamus - Article 20 de la Loi sur les langues officielles, L.R.Q. (1985) (4e suppl.), ch. 31 - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle commis une erreur de droit en refusant de sanctionner la violation par la Commission de l’immigration et du statut de réfugié  d’une obligation linguistique quasi constitutionnelle, celle que lui impose l’article 20 de la Loi sur les langues officielles, par la délivrance du bref de mandamus demandé qui obligerait la CISR à mettre toutes ses décisions à la disposition du public dans les deux langues officielles?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Franceschina Martelli

c. (27811)

 La Commission des affaires sociales

- et -

 La Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Procédure - Contrôle judiciaire - Norme de contrôle applicable - Preuve - Dommages corporels - «Thin skull rule» - Res ipsa loquitur - Règles de justice naturelle - Compétence de la Commission des affaires sociales - Appréciation de la preuve médicale - Relation entre l’accident dont a été victime la demanderesse et sa lombalgie.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 10 avril 1992

Commission des affaires sociales

(Dr Bisaillon et Me Tellier, commissaires)

Appel de deux décisions de la Société de

l’assurance automobile du Québec accueilli en

partie

Le 31 mai 1994      

Commission des affaires sociales

(Dr Therrien et Me Rudel-Tessier, commissaires)

Requête en révision rejetée

The Gazette, une division de Southam Inc.

c. (27753)

Syndicat canadien des communications, de l'énergie et du papier, section locale 145, SCEP

-et-

 Mme Rita Blondin, MM. Eriberto Di Paolo, Umed Gohil, Horace Holloway, Pierre Rebetez, Michael Thomson, Joseph Brazeau, Robert Davies, Jean‑Pierre Martin, Leslie Stockwell et Marc Tremblay

-et-

Me André Sylvestre (Qué.)

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

André Arthur

c. (27772)

Le procureur général du Canada (C.A.F.) (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Requête en radiation - Caractère théorique du recours - Caractère approprié du recours - Intérêt requis pour attaquer la décision du Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes - Compétence pour se prononcer sur la constitutionnalité de la loi constitutive du Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes -  La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en ordonnant que soit expurgées du dossier les conclusions b), c), d) et e) de la demande de contrôle judiciaire du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

Gaston Lebrun

c. (27618)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Droit criminel - Défense -Législation - Interprétation -  L’alinéa 273.2b)  du Code criminel  porte-t-il atteinte aux droits garantis par les articles 11d) et 7 de la Charte  en ce qu’il opère un renversement du fardeau de preuve de la mens rea sur l’accusé? - L’alinéa 273.2b)  augmente-t-il le fardeau de preuve de l’accusé, ce qui porte atteinte aux droits garantis par les articles 11d) et 7 de la Charte ? - L’alinéa 273.2b) impose-t-il la preuve d’une mens rea objective ce qui porte atteinte aux droits garantis par l’article 7  de la Charte ? - L’alinéa 273.2b) va-t-il à l’encontre du principe de la gradation de la responsabilité pénale, ce qui porte atteinte aux droits garantis par l’article 7  de la Charte ? - Ces violations aux articles 7  et 11d)  de la Charte  constituent-elles des limites raisonnables et justifiées dans une société démocratique? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle  erré en droit, en ne reconnaissant pas que les erreurs commises par le juge de première instance dans ses directives au jury constituaient un déni de justice fondamentale justifiant la tenue d’un nouveau procès? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en droit, en affirmant que la preuve de l’absence de consentement de la part de la présumée victime constitue une preuve prima facie de l’intention coupable de l’accusé dans le cadre d’une accusation d’agression sexuelle, ce qui impose alors un fardeau à l’accusé d’apporter des éléments de preuve tendant à démontrer l’absence de cette intention coupable?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Raymond Haid Shalala

v. (27810)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Invasion of privacy - Trial - Whether the present statutory scheme allowing electronic interception is constitutionally invalid as a result of the 1993 amendments to Part VI of the Criminal Code  - Whether the 1993 amendments to the wiretap provisions of the Criminal Code  apply retrospectively - Whether the standards of review on a Garofoli hearing will vary depending on the nature of evidentiary record and, if so, what are the different standards - Whether s. 8 of the Charter  mandates a particularity requirement to be found for the affidavit and authorization order as a minimum constitutional standard - What is the scope and extent of the requirement of investigative necessity; what is the standard to be applied in judging investigative necessity.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Firm of Kirkland, Murphy & Ain

v. (27763)

John R. Wernikowski (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Civil procedure - Striking out a pleading - Abuse of process - Negligence - Criminal lawyer - Collateral attack on final decision of court of competent jurisdiction in previous proceedings - Respondent convicted of two unrelated sexually related crimes - Respondent commenced civil claim against criminal defence lawyer for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty - Whether it is an abuse of process, absent fraud or fresh evidence, to permit a convicted offender, having exhausted his appeals, to re-litigate his criminal conviction by commencing an action against his lawyer for negligence in the conduct of the criminal proceedings - Whether a different test should be applied where the civil action involves allegations of negligence against a lawyer for the conduct of the criminal proceeding, where the criminal conviction involved a sexual offence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Société en commandite 2858‑9893 Québec

c. (27673)

2420‑3242 Québec Inc. "IN TRUST", Société en commandite Place de la Loire, Gérald Champagne et Roland Landry

- et -

Sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec et l’officier du Bureau de la publicité des droits de la circonscription foncière de Chicoutimi (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial - Droit des biens - Société en commandite - Créancier et débiteur - Hypothèque - Confusion - Obligation de bonne foi - Société en commandite ayant un patrimoine distinct de ses commanditaires - Prête-nom - Est-ce que la Cour d’appel a privé la demanderesse et «le groupe» de vingt-trois (23) personnes qui n’était pas partie au débat de première instance de leur droit à une audition impartiale de leur cause par un tribunal qui ne soit pas préjugé, conformément à l’article 23 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne du Québec, L.R.Q. ch. C-12, art. 23?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Gérald Robitaille et Associés Ltée

c. (27799)

Sa Majesté la Reine du Canada (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial - Droit fiscal - Faillite - Avis d’intention - Compensation statutaire - «Recours» - La compensation statutaire prévue à l’article 224.1 de la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu peut-elle faire échec à la suspension des recours prévue au paragraphe 69(1)  de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité ? - La compensation légale est-elle possible dans un contexte d’insolvabilité entre une créance pré-avis d’intention et une créance post-avis d’intention? - Art. 69(1)  de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité  - Art. 224.1 de la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu. 

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

JULY 31, 2000 / LE 31 JUILLET 2000

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Major

Paul Kenneth Bernardo

v. (27925)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Trial - Procedure - Charge to jury - Whether trial judge erred in law in concluding that section 635(1)  of the Criminal  Code of Canada  did not alternately require the Crown to declare whether or not it was peremptorily challenging a prospective juror before resolving the Appellant’s challenge for cause - Whether trial judge misdirected the jury with respect to how the burden of proof applied to the issue of whether another person killed either or both of the victims - Whether learned trial judge failed to adequately warn the jury against inferring from other person’s plea agreement with the Crown that she could not have been the actual killer of either victim.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

May 23, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada  

Application for leave to appeal filed

Patrick Russell Hurst

v. (27919)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Criminal Law - Disclosure - Admissibility of Evidence - Right to a fair trial - Whether the Crown has a duty to provide the accused with full disclosure according to s. 603  of the Criminal   Code  and ss. 7  and 11 (d) of the Charter - Whether the right of the accused to make full answer and defence as stated in s. 650  of the Criminal Code  is denied where full disclosure is denied - Whether the undisclosed driving record was inadmissible as evidence according to British Columbia’s Supreme Court Rules, B.C. Reg. 221/90 - Whether the accused’s right to a fair trial as guaranteed by s. 11 (d) of the Charter is denied where the Court of Appeal ignores its own law and condones the use of inadmissible evidence - Whether allegations of a prior conviction used for cross-examination must be proven to eliminate both prejudice and erroneous fact finding - Whether the resulting prejudice and the denial of the accused’s right “to be presumed innocent until proven guilty” as stated in s. 11 (d) of the Charter results in an unfair trial where proof is not provided, and the alleged prior conviction is erroneous - Whether when the Court of Appeal eroded the legitimacy of the judicial process when it ignored errors made at trial that strike at the accused’s fundamental rights enshrined in ss. 7  and 11 (d) of the Charter.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Rachel Kleven

v. (27586)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Defence - Did the Court of Appeal err in law in ruling that it was permissible for the trial judge to leave with the jury the issue of whether the Applicant was a party to the offence under s. 21  of the Criminal Code ? - Was the instruction with respect to s. 21  of the Criminal Code  inadequate, both in law and in failing to relate the evidence to the law, or both? - Did the Court of Appeal err in law in failing to find that the verdict of guilt against the Applicant, based in whole or in part upon the testimony of the co-accused, was unreasonable?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

United Transportation Union

v. (27765)

International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, Via Rail Canada Inc.

and  George Cairns et al. (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Procedural law - Labour Law - Stay of decision of Canada Industrial Relations Board pending judicial review - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred by applying the wrong test in determining when a stay of a Canada Industrial Relations Board decision should be granted - Whether, even if the appropriate test was applied, the Federal Court of Appeal erred in concluding that all of the conditions of that test were met - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in making findings where there was no evidence to support such findings and where there was in fact evidence to the contrary - Whether costs should have been awarded - Whether the  issues raised by this application are of sufficient national importance as to warrant granting leave to appeal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Robert E. Zelinski and  Ken A. Whent

v. (27748)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Interest - Certified art work acquired cheaply by lawyers and donated to approved public art galleries - Appraised value much more than cost of acquisition - Appraised value deducted from professional incomes - Minister reassessing taxpayers’ returns - Whether Minister could advance an alternative basis for reassessment not raised until pleadings delivered after the expiration of the limitation period - Whether interest payable on tax as of the date of assessment notwithstanding that taxes were not determined to be outstanding by Minister until after reassessment, thus imposing on Canadian taxpayers a burden contrary to that expressed in subsection 161(1) of the Act - If so, whether commencement date for interest is the date of a Notice of Reassessment, irrespective of the grounds relied upon by the Minister, or the date when the grounds upon which the Minister achieved success is first raised.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel

Alan Emmette Simmons

v. (27979)

The United States of America (Crim.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Extradition - Whether the offence in the United States of America of knowingly transporting a minor in foreign commerce between Canada and the United States with intent that she engage in sexual activity for which the perpetrator could be charged with the criminal offence of sexual assault satisfies the double criminality requirement under s. 18(1)(b) of the Extradition Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-23, as amended.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Dans l’affaire de la faillite de:

Le Château d’Amos Ltée

débitrice

ENTRE :

Ville d'Amos

c. (27653)

Raymond, Chabot Inc. et Banque Canadienne Impériale de Commerce,

Compagnie Trust National, Banque Laurentienne du Canada,

Centre d'aide aux entreprises Harricana Inc. et

Commission scolaire Harricana (Qué.)

ET ENTRE :

Procureure générale du Québec

c. (27653)

Raymond, Chabot Inc. et Banque Canadienne Impériale de Commerce,

Compagnie Trust National, Banque Laurentienne du Canada,

Centre d'aide aux entreprises Harricana Inc., Ville d'Amos, et

Commission scolaire Harricana (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial - Faillite - Ordre de collocation - Municipalités - Taxes foncières - Hypothèque légale et priorité - Créance garantie - Application, interprétation et interrelation de l’article 136(1) (e) de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité , L.R.C. (1985), ch. B-3  (ci-après “L.F.I. ”) et des articles 2651(5) C.c.Q. et 498 Loi sur les cités et villes, L.R.Q., ch. C-19 (ci-après “L.C.V.”).

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Dragisa Gajic

v. (27750)

Her Majesty the Queen in the Name of Revenue Canada, Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of the

Ministry of Finance, and Corporate Relations for the Province of British Columbia (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Minister of National Revenue assessing Applicant for income tax for several years - Assessment grossly overstating Applicant’s income - Applicant receiving remission of portion of excess taxes - Provincial government refusing that similar remission be granted of provincial portion of excess taxes -  Did the government of British Columbia suspend and deny the Applicant’s rights to proper adjudication in the Supreme Court of British Columbia and in the Court of Appeal of British Columbia by ordering to the Court to stop the review of the claim? - Did the government of British Columbia abuse its power in discriminating against the Applicant under British Columbian law?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Lamerton & Associates Professional Surveyors Ltd.

v. (27746)

Frederick John Quinn, Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (Y.T.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Motion to dismiss action - Yukon Territory Supreme Court Rules, Rule 19(24) - Limitation of Acts - Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.Y. 1986, c. 104, s. 2 - Torts - Fiduciary Duty - Damages - Economic Loss - The scope of the principle of liability for pure economic loss and its application - Whether this Court should define the scope of fiduciary obligation in traditionally non fiduciary roles - Whether the scope of the discoverability rule and the steps to which a legislature must go to override it needs to be clarified at a national level.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Dans l’affaire de la faillite de:

147557 Canada Ltée (Gridev Inc.)

Débitrice

ENTRE :

Procureure générale du Québec

c. (27651)

Ville de l'Île Bizard, Banque Nationale du Canada, et Le Conseil scolaire de l'Île de Montréal (Qué.)

ET ENTRE :

Le Conseil scolaire de l'Île de Montréal

c. (27651)

Ville de l'Île Bizard, Banque Nationale du Canada (Qué.)

ET ENTRE :

Ville de l'Île Bizard

c. (27651)

Le Conseil scolaire de l'Île de Montréal,

Banque Nationale du Canada, Caron Bélanger Ernst & Young Inc. (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial - Faillite - Ordre de collocation - Municipalités - Taxes foncières - Hypothèque légale et priorité - Créance garantie - Application, interprétation et interrelation de l’article 136(1) (e) de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité , L.R.C. (1985), ch. B-3  (ci-après “L.F.I. ”) et des articles 2651(5) C.c.Q. et 498 Loi sur les cités et villes, L.R.Q., ch. C-19 (ci-après “L.C.V.”).

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27912)

Keith Arnold Wren (Crim.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Care or control of a motor vehicle while impaired - Whether act or conduct of the accused in relation to the motor vehicle must create a risk of danger from putting the car in motion or in some other way.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

February 11, 1998

Ontario Court of Justice

(MacPhee J.)

Acquittal from charge of being impaired while in the care or control of a motor vehicle

February 10, 1999

Superior Court of Justice

(Millette J.)

Summary conviction appeal dismissed

March 14, 2000

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Laskin, Feldman, and  O'Connor JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

May 15, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

Paul MacInnes

v. (27899)

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

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

Volf Friedman, Bella Seyder and Shneor Friedman (minor)

v. (27930)

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (F.C.T.D.-Que.)

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

June 16, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

Succession de Dame Sylvia Schwartz

c. (27855)

Dionysia Zerbisias (Qué.)

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

Salvatore Gramaglia

v. (27729)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Whether lower courts erred in disposition of Applicant's application for judicial review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

AUGUST 8, 2000 / LE 8 AOÛT 2000

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges Iacobucci et Major

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27856)

Kambiz Mafi (Crim.)(B.C.)

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

Helmut Johannes Merz

v. (27918)

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

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

Terry Lee Meidel

v. (27909)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedural law - Extension of time to appeal conviction and sentence - Trial in absentia - Interpretation - Section 431.1 (now s. 475) of the Criminal Code , R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46  - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in denying the Applicant’s extension of time to appeal - Whether the learned trial judge erred in law in proceeding against the Applicant in absentia - Whether sentence imposed on the Applicant was disproportionate?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

David Beyo

v. (27917)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

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

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Godwin Smith

v. (27878)

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

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

Barrie Romkey and Brian Romkey

v. (27777)

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

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

Wanxia Liao

v. (27840)

Ontario Human Rights Commission, University of Toronto and David Waterhouse (Ont.)

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

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Bastarache et LeBel

Jacob F. Goohsen

v. (27926)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Credibility - Deference to findings of fact by a trial judge - R. v.  Brooks, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 237.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Steeve Martel

c. (27907)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Directives du juge au jury - Doute raisonnable - Fardeau imposé à la défense - Distinction entre meurtre et homicide involontaire - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en omettant de se prononcer quant à l’erreur du juge de première instance qui a imposé à la défense le fardeau de soulever un doute raisonnable pour amener l’acquittement? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en n’ordonnant pas la tenue d’un nouveau procès alors qu’elle a déterminé que les directives données au jury relativement à la distinction entre meurtre et homicide involontaire coupable ne rencontraient pas les exigences requises? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en déterminant que l’article 229 c )  du Code criminel  s’appliquait aux faits de la cause? - Article 686(1)b)(iii) du Code criminel .

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Stéphane Bourbeau

c. (27906)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Directives du juge au jury - Doute raisonnable - Fardeau imposé à la défense - Distinction entre meurtre et homicide involontaire - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en omettant de se prononcer quant à l’erreur du juge de première instance qui a imposé à la défense le fardeau de soulever un doute raisonnable pour amener l’acquittement? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en n’ordonnant pas la tenue d’un nouveau procès alors qu’elle a déterminé que les directives données au jury relativement à la distinction entre meurtre et homicide involontaire coupable ne rencontraient pas les exigences requises? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en déterminant que l’article 229 c )  du Code criminel  s’appliquait aux faits de la cause? - Article 686(1)b)(iii) du Code criminel .

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Gary John Lazeo

v. (27830)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Regulatory Offences - Money Laundering - Narcotics - Entrapment - Resulting from a police undercover operation, the Applicant was convicted of charges under the Proceeds of Crime (money laundering) Act, S.C. 1991, c. 26 and of attempting to launder money contrary to the Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. N-1 - Police had no reasonable suspicion that the Applicant was failing to comply with legislation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred on a fundamental point of Canadian criminal law and procedure, in upholding the Applicant’s convictions where the evidence at trial, conducted entirely on an Agreed Statement of Facts, contained a clear and unequivocal admission that the Crown had failed to prove the attempted money laundering counts as particularized in the Indictment - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the decision of the trial judge that a defence based on “random virtue testing”, entrapment, was not available to accused persons charged with the commission of a regulatory offence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the trial judge’s decision  that offences under s. 6 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) Act are properly classified as purely regulatory offences as opposed to criminal offences with regulatory aspects to them, quasi criminal offences, or criminal offences - Whether regulatory offences are exempt from the application of the defence of “random virtue testing” entrapment, as defined in R. v. Barnes, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 449 - Whether charges of attempted offences, as opposed to charges of substantive offences are an exception to the rule that it is a fundamental principle of criminal law that the offence, as particularized in the charge, must be proved.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Apotex Inc.

v. (27764)

Merck & Co., Inc. and Merck Frosst Canada Inc. (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law -Property law - Food and drugs - Patents - Res judicata - Permanent injunctions - Variation or stay of injunction - What is the proper scope of res judicata in circumstances where a party: defends an action brought against it in respect of a definite subject matter on a particular basis; intentionally and expressly adopts one position in respect of the earlier subject matter but proposes to reserve its position in respect of any other subject matter; does not seek to relitigate the earlier subject matter on the basis that some issue was not previously raised at trial; and seeks to raise its previously reserved position in respect of new subject matter discovered after trial?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Gail Snider

v. (27783)

Manitoba Association of Registered Nurses (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Appeal - Professional Misconduct - Disciplinary committee of association for registered nurses revokes a nurse’s registration for eight counts of professional misconduct - Whether tribunal considered evidence with respect to each of eight distinct charges separately - Reliance on similar fact evidence - Presumption of  innocence, conflicting oaths and standard of proof - Absence of expert opinion on whether conduct constituted professional misconduct - Receipt of legal advice from counsel in absence of person affected by the decision - Weight of character reference letters in assessing appropriate discipline - Wrongful characterization of evidence, reliance on irrelevant evidence and considering evidence in totality as it relates to distinct charges - Appropriate relief if right to life, liberty and security of person in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice was denied - Standard of review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Allan Durand

v. (27818)

Jean Bastien (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Motor Vehicles - Liability of registered owner of vehicle - Whether the Court of Appeal of Alberta erred in law, or alternatively in fact of law, in upholding the judgment of the trial judge - Whether the manner of determining ownership of a registered vehicle is of public importance - Whether the onus upon a party attempting to rebut a presumption of ownership should be clearly identified as to the nature of evidence required and the legal test to be applied to the evidence - The interpretation of the intent of the Legislature of the Province of Alberta with respect to insurance and personal injury law.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM: Gonthier, Binnie and Arbour JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour