Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

October 12, 2001  1792 - 1816                                                           le 12 octobre 2001

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

George Ghanotakis

George Ghanotakis

c. (28684)

Imprimerie regionale ARL Ltée, et al. (Qué.)

Claude St. Laurent

Lacoste, St. Laurent

DATE DE PRODUCTION 4.9.2001

District of Parry Sound Social Services Administration Board

William Horton

Blake, Cassels & Graydon

v. (28819)

Ontario Public Service Employees Union, Local 324, et al. (Ont.)

Peggy E. Smith

Eliot, Smith

FILING DATE 18.9.2001

Aline Goyette

Aline Goyette

c. (28794)

Gisèle Léveillée, et al. (Qué.)

Gilles Brazeau

Brazeau, Grégoire, Cliche

DATE DE PRODUCTION 25.9.2001

Donna Nicole Lacroix, a minor suing by her litigation guardian, Janice Elaine Lacroix, et al.

David G. Hill

Hill Abra Dewar

v. (28796)

Francis Stephen Dominique (Man.)

Helga D. Van Iderstine

Aikins, MacAuley & Thorvaldson

FILING DATE 25.9.2001

Gore Mutual Insurance Company

Eric A. Dolden

Dolden Wallace Folick

v. (28821)

Jim Christopher Churchland, et al. (B.C.)

Michael Armstrong

Armstrong & Company

FILING DATE 25.9.2001

Elliot C. Wightman, et al.

Serge Gauget

Heenan Blaikie

v. (28773)

Wolfgang Stolzenberg, et al. (Qué.)

Wolfgang Stolzenberg

DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.9.2001

Brenda Yvonne Muliner

Kenneth B. Oliver

Bayshore Law Group

v. (28798)

Glen Kenneth Bindley (B.C.)

Rose-Mary Liu Basham, Q.C.

Basham Thompson & Liu

FILING DATE   6.9.2001

Patricia Anne Spears-Haugen

Patricia Anne Spears-Haugen

v. (28822)

Randolph Bertram Haugen, et al. (Ont.)

Jeffrey Richey

FILING DATE   27.9.2001

John Correia, et al.

Theodore H. Kantor

v. (28820)

William Roland Danyluk (Alta.)

Eric F. Macklin, Q.C.

Duncan & Craig

FILING DATE 17.9.2001

David Monias, et al.

Cy Fien

Fillmore Riley

v. (28830)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.)

Gérald L. Chartier

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 26.9.2001

Lawrence Morrisroe

Bruce McDonald, Q.C.

Bennett Jones

v. (28833)

Ernest F. Stevens, et al. (Alta.)

Alan D. Hunter, Q.C.

Gowling Lafleur Henderson

FILING DATE   26.9.2001

Giant Grosmont Petroleums Ltd., et al.

James W. Rose, Q.C.

Fraser Milner Casgrain

v. (28827)

The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (Alta.)

J. Michael Bruni

Alberta Energy and Utilities Board

FILING DATE 27.9.2001

Duncan & Craig, et al.

Phyllis A. Smith, Q.C.

Emery Jamieson

v. (28828)

West Edmonton Mall Property Inc., et al.(Alta.)

Dan Gallagher

Bennett Jones

FILING DATE 27.9.2001

Geoffrey Saldanha, et al.

J. Brian Casey

Baker & McKenzie

v. (28829)

Frederick H. Beals, III, et al. (Ont.)

Messod Boussidan

Levine, Sherkin, Boussidan

FILING DATE 27.9.2001

and between

Dominic Trivy

Neal H. Roth

v. (28829)

Frederick H. Beals, III, et al. (Ont.)

Messod Boussidan

Levine, Sherkin, Boussidan

FILING DATE 28.9.2001

The Crown in Right of Alberta, et al.

Hugh J.D. McPhail, Q.C.

McLennan Ross

v. (28834)

Audrey Allen, et al. (Alta.)

Brent Gawne

Gawne & Associates

FILING DATE 27.9.2001

Société du Grand Théâtre de Québec

Richard Laflamme

Huot Laflamme

c. (28825)

Communauté urbaine de Québec, et al. (Qué.)

Richard Grondin

Alain, Tardif & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 28.9.2001

Canadian Cable Television Association

Thomas G. Heintzman, Q.C.

McCarthy Tétrault

v. (28826)

Barrie Public Utilities, et al. (F.C.)

Alan Mark

Goodmans

FILING DATE 28.9.2001

Siemens Westinghouse Inc.

Ronald D. Lunau

Gowling Lafleur Henderson

v. (28831)

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

Michael F. Ciavaglia

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 28.9.2001

La Compagnie Pétrolière Impériale Limitée

Pierre Legault

Desjardins Ducharme Stein Monast

c. (28835)

La procureure générale du Québec pour et au nom du ministre de l’Environnement, Monsieur Paul Bégin (Qué.)

Claude Bouchard

P.G. du Québec

DATE DE PRODUCTION 28.9.2001

BMW Canada Inc., et al.

François Shanks

Marchand Magnan Melançon Forget

c. (28832)

Automobiles Jalbert Inc. (Qué.)

Pierre Delisle

Pothier Delisle

DATE DE PRODUCTION 1.10.2001

Tri Gro Enterprises Ltd., et al.

John Nelligan, Q.C.

Nelligan O’Brien Payne

v. (28789)

Craig Pyke, et al. (Ont.)

Donald R. Good

FILING DATE 2.10.2001

Christian Savard

Christian Savard

c. (28824)

Banque nationale du Canada (Qué.)

Jacques Demers

Jolicoeur, Lacasse

DATE DE PRODUCTION 2.10.2001

Michael Ken Budai

Ian Donaldson, Q.C.

Donaldson Jetté

v. (28742)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

W.S. Berardino, Q.C.

Berardino & Harris

FILING DATE 3.10.2001

OCTOBER 9, 2001 / LE 9 OCTOBRE 2001

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache

Joseph P. Melanson

v. (28696)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Procedural Law - Trial - Sentencing - Applicant charged with attempted murder and aggravated sexual assault - Jury unable to reach unanimous verdict on counts as charged but return guilty verdict of aggravated assault  - Mistrial declared on counts as charged and verdict of guilty of aggravated assault entered - Second trial commences on both counts as originally charged but aggravated sexual assault charge dismissed as autrefois convict - Second jury finds applicant guilty of attempted murder - Dangerous offender application dismissed in attempted murder proceedings but new hearing ordered on appeal - Double jeopardy -  Jury proceedings - Dangerous offender proceedings - Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that a verdict by a jury is not a conviction or a final disposition or that a matter is not res judicata when the underlying issue is adjudicated or that applicant was not tried and convicted twice for the same act over the same legal issue or failed to address whether assault can be a lesser-included charge of attempted murder - Whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to address that the first trial judge did not respond satisfactorily to a jury question on the meaning of intent or in not finding that a jury instruction on intent may have been misleading or that the second trial judge likely created the dilemma cautioned against in Houghton v. R. 93 CCC (3d) 99 - Whether Court of Appeal for Ontario err by deeming thoughts to be actual behavior, allowing double sentencing or by not addressing whether the assault rose to the level of an aggravated assault.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

September 28, 1999

Ontario Court (General Division)

(Roberts J.)

Stay of aggravated assault proceedings

March 14, 2001

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(McMurtry C.J.,  Carthy and Laskin JJ.A.)

Applicant’s appeals from convictions dismissed; Crown’s appeals from sentence and aggravated assault proceedings dismissed; Crown’s appeal seeking new dangerous offender hearing allowed

June 29, 2001

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Moldaver J.A.)

Order staying March 14, 2001 order, with conditions

July 26, 2001

Supreme Court of Canada 

Application for leave to appeal and extension of time filed

Abdel Moneim Mousa and Barbara Aweryn

v. (28746)

City of Coquitlam (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Municipal law - Zoning by-law - Building constructed as a five-plex in area zoned for single family dwellings - Respondent owners enjoined to bring the building into compliance with the by-law - Whether municipality’s entitlement to statutory injunction is absolute or subject to limitations - Whether prosecution under the by-law was selective - Whether duty of fairness owed to the Applicants was violated

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Albert Carbone, Cathy Horvath and Kit Kat Bar & Grill, Restaurants and Clubs Inc.

v. (28662)

Relco Inc., Ernest Luwish and City of Toronto (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Appeal - Contempt of court - Variation of consent judgment - What is the extent to which a court can amend or vary consent judgments, absent either a further consent of the parties or specific statutory authority - When can a court rectify a consent judgment, where rectification is not sought by the parties, no record respecting rectification is before the court, and the judge in first instance did not purport to rectify the consent judgment.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

September 16, 1999

Superior Court of Justice

(Wilson J.)

Consent judgment giving effect to Minutes of Settlement resulting from Respondent Relco Inc.’s action against Applicants

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel

Pavage Rolland Fortier Inc.

c. (28582)

Caisse Populaire Desjardins de la Plaine

- et -

Le Forum de Lanaudière Inc., Forum de La Plaine Inc. et Bunny Lankowitch (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Code civil - Enrichissement injustifié - Droits hypothécaires - Prise en paiement - Interprétation -Articles 1493 à 1496 et 2783 du Code civil du Québec -  La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en considérant qu’une norme juridique pouvait constituer une justification à l’enrichissement aux dépens d’autrui, alors que cette norme n’est pas comprise dans les cas de justification prévus à l’article 1494 C.c.Q.? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en considérant que la norme juridique contenue dans l’article 2783 C.c.Q. pouvait constituer une justification à l’enrichissement dont profite un créancier hypothécaire qui prend en paiement un immeuble amélioré par un tiers appauvri au sens des articles 1493 à 1496 C.c.Q.?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Sadasivarao Byrapaneni

v. (28520)

Curtis Raymond and Krista Bennett (N.B.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contract - Lease of residential unit - Apartment abandoned part way through lease - Leaseholders finding another couple for apartment - Landlord renting another vacant apartment to other couple - Landlord seeking rent for balance of term of lease - Whether a lease is a contract or an estate in land - Whether “lost sale” principle applicable - Obligation of a landlord to mitigate loss.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

December 20, 1999

Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick (Small Claims Court)

(Garnett J.)

Damages of $3000 awarded to the Applicant; Respondents jointly liable

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia

v. (28745)

Unifund Assurance Company of Canada (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Conflict of laws - Accident occurring in British Columbia and plaintiffs residing in Ontario - Plaintiffs paid no-fault insurance by own insurer - Action for damages in British Columbia finding liability against parties insured by Applicant - Insurance companies bringing actions in both provinces - Plaintiffs’ province requiring arbitration procedure - Application by out-of-province insurer for stay of arbitration proceeding granted - Whether the Ontario regulatory scheme applies to out-of-province insurers in respect of an out-of-province accident -- Whether an arbitrator appointed under that scheme therefore has jurisdiction to proceed – Whether  the appropriate forum for resolution of a dispute can be determined without taking into account constitutional imperatives -- What principles should be applied to resolve the prospect of potentially inconsistent decisions in parallel proceedings -- Whether the Ontario legislative scheme ousts the inherent jurisdiction of the provincial superior courts to grant a stay of arbitration proceedings.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 29, 2000

Superior Court of Justice

(Campbell J.)

Applicant’s motion for a stay of Respondent’s application seeking appointment of an arbitrator, granted

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie

Brian Thomas Pratt

v. (28732)

The Board of Governors of the University of Lethbridge (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Labour relations - Collective agreement - University professor denied tenure - University attempting to hold tenure rehearing - Rehearing process not provided for in collective agreement - Whether essential character of dispute arises from interpretation, application, administration or violation of collective agreement so as to oust jurisdiction of courts - Whether conduct of University calls into question integrity of labour relations system warranting judicial intervention.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Alexander Centre Industries Limited

v. (28680)

Kenneth McNamara (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Master and servant - Wrongful dismissal - Damages - Double recovery - Whether disability payments received by former employee during notice period should be deducted from damages award for wrongful dismissal

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

May 24, 2000

Ontario Superior Court of Justice

(Hennessy J.)

Respondent awarded 281,066.08 plus interest in damages for wrongful dismissal

April 30, 2001

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(McMurtry C.J.O., Borins and MacPherson JJ.A.)

Applicant’s appeal against quantum of damages dismissed

Cornell Engineering Company Limited

v. (28665)

978011 Ontario Ltd. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Person experienced in business signing 11-page contract after reading only the first page - Respondent seeking to rely on termination clause - Whether parties to a contract are to be held to their bargain, or whether, in appropriate circumstances, a court of equity may intervene to relieve against an unjust or unconscionable bargain - What circumstances suffice to permit a court of equity to grant rectification for a unilateral mistake? - What is the appropriate standard of review to be used by an appellate court with respect to an exercise of equitable discretion by a trial judge?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION / DEMANDES DE RÉEXAMEN

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

Pierre Benge, et al. c. Hôpital Général de Toronto, et al. (Ont.)(27010)

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie

Eric Scheuneman v. Attorney General of Canada (Natural Resources Canada) (F.C.)(28344)

OCTOBER 11, 2001 / LE 11 OCTOBRE 2001

28633                    Lilydale Co‑Operative Limited ‑ v. ‑ FFM Holdings Ltd. and Sylvester Mertz (Alta.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondents FFM Holdings Ltd. and Sylvester Mertz.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur des intimés FFM Holdings Ltd. et Sylvester Mertz.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Company law - Co-operatives - Right of withdrawing members to redeem equity from co-operative - Whether co-operative’s by-laws violate s. 39(2)(c) of the  Co-operative Associations Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. C-24.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28.9.2001

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the response of the respondents the Attorney General of British Columbia and the Director of Vital Statistics

Darrell Wayne Trociuk

v. (28726)

Attorney General of British Columbia and the Director of Vital Statistics, et al. (B.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la réponse des intimés le procureur général de la Colombie-britannique et le directeur des statistiques de l’état civil

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to September 19, 2001.

1.10.2001

Before /Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motions to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondents’ responses

First National Properties Ltd., et al.

v. (28705)

Robert McMinn, et al. (B.C.)

Requêtes en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt des réponses des intimés

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time to serve and file the response of the respondent Robert McMinn extended to 30 days.

Time to serve and file the response of the respondents Highlands and Bruce Woodbury, et al. extended to October 1, 2001.

2.10.2001

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum and book of authorities of the intervener the Attorney General of Quebec

Deborah Smith

v. (27844)

Attorney General of Canada (F.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intervenant le procureur général du Québec

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 19 septembre 2001.

2.10.2001

Before / Devant:   LEBEL J.

Further order on motion for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Canadian Association for Statutory Human Rights Agencies

IN/DANS:              Louise Gosselin

c. (27418)

Le Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)

Autre ordonnance sur une requête en autorisation d'intervention

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

À LA SUITE D’UNE DEMANDE PRÉSENTÉE RESPECTIVEMENT par l’Association canadienne des Commissions et Conseil des droits de la personne visant à obtenir l’autorisation d’intervenir dans l’appel susmentionné et suite à l’ordonnance du 5 septembre 2001;

IL EST EN OUTRE ORDONNÉ que la plaidoirie de l’intervenante soit ainsi limité à dix (10) minutes.

UPON APPLICATION by the Canadian Association for Statutory Human Rights Agencies for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the order of September 5, 2001;

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said intervener is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding 10 minutes at the hearing of the appeal.

3.10.2001

Before / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum of the respondents The Wellcome Foundation Ltd. and Glaxo Wellcome Inc.

Novopharm Ltd., et al.

v. (28287)

The Wellcome Foundation Limited, et al. (F.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le mémoire des intimés The Wellcome Foundation Ltd. and Glaxo Wellcome Inc.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to November 12, 2001.

3.10.2001

BEFORE / DEVANT:   LEBEL J.

Miscellaneous motion

Christopher James Clay

v. (28189)

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

and

Victor Eugene Caine

v. (28148)

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

and

David Malmo-Levine

v. (28026)

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

Autre requête

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

After a review of the motion filed by appellants and supportive documents;

a) The time to serve and file the factum of the appellant Clay is extended to October 19, 2001.

b) The appellants Clay, Caine and Malmo-Levine will be allowed to file a joint statement of legislative facts not to exceed 40 pages.  In addition, they will be allowed to file individual factums not exceeding 30 pages each.

3.10.2001

Before / Devant:   LEBEL J.

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the application for leave

Philip Ofume

v. (28741)

Southwest Apartment Limited. (N.S.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la demande d'autorisation

GRANTED IN PART / ACCORDÉE EN PARTIE

After reviewing the motion and supporting documents, the motion is granted in part and the delay to file and serve a motion for leave to appeal is extended to Friday, November 30, 2001.

3.10.2001

Before / Devant:   LEBEL J.

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the application for leave

Denise Nagel

v. (28780)

Cuelenaere, Kendall, Katzman & Richards, et al. (Sask.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la demande d'autorisation

DISMISSED WITHOUT COSTS / REJETÉE SANS DÉPENS

The applicant has filed the application to extend the time to serve and file an application for leave to appeal, from an order of the Court of Appeal for the province of Saskatchewan and for ancillary motions.  A review of the motion and the material in support confirms that the applicant has failed to establish sufficient reasons for an extension of time.  The motion for an extension of time and all other ancillary motions are dismissed without costs. 

4.10.2001

Before / Devant:   GONTHIER J.

Further order on motions for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Council of Forest Industries

Truck Loggers Association

IN/DANS:              Chief Councillor Mathew Hill, also known as Tha-Iathatk, on his own behalf and on behalf of all other members of the Kitkatla Band, et al.

v. (27801)

The Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture, et al. (B.C.)

Autre ordonnance sur des requêtes en autorisation d'intervention

DISMISSED / REJETÉES

UPON APPLICATION by the Council of Forest Industries and the Truck Loggers Association for leave to intervene in the above appeal and further to the Order of November 21, 2000 granting leave to intervene and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length;

AND HAVING RECEIVED and considered the written arguments of the parties and the interveners;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1.             The request to present oral argument by the said interveners is hereby denied.

5.10.2001

Before / Devant:   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

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

Attorney General of Nova Scotia

v. (28179)

Susan Walsh, et al. (N.S.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et dossier de l’appelant

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to September 28, 2001.

3.10.2001

A.P.

v. (28352)

L.D., et al. (Que.)

(leave)

9.10.2001

BY/PAR:                Procureur général du Québec

IN/DANS:              David Scott Hall

  v. (28223)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

9.10.2001

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

Ivon Shearing

v. (27782)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Criminal)(By Leave)

Richard C.C. Peck, Q.C., David M. Paciocco and Nikos Harris for the appellant.

Frank Addario for the intervener Criminal Lawyers’ Association (Ontario).

William F. Ehrcke, Q.C. and Jennifer Duncan for the respondent.

Leslie Paine and Christine Bartlett-Hughes for the intervener the Attorney General for Ontario.

Sheilah Martin, Q.C. and Ritu Khullar for the intervener LEAF.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Criminal law - Evidence - Similar fact evidence - Sexual offences - Cross-examination - Complainant’s privacy interests - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in upholding the trial judge’s admission of similar fact evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in upholding the trial judge’s ruling limiting the cross-examination of a complainant on the content of her personal diary.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Preuve - Preuve de faits similaires - Infractions sexuelles - Contre-interrogatoire - Droits de la plaignante à sa vie privée - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en confirmant la décision du juge du procès d’admettre une preuve de faits similaires? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en confirmant la décision du juge du procès de restreindre le contre-interrogatoire de la plaignante relativement au contenu de son journal intime?

9.10.2001

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

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27996)

James Handy (Ont.)(Criminal)(By Leave)

Christopher Webb for the appellant.

David E. Harris and Richard N. Stern for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Criminal Law - Evidence - Similar Fact Evidence - Former wife’s testimony regarding respondent’s past sexual acts admitted into respondent’s trial for sexual assault causing bodily harm - Whether potential for collusion is a serious consideration when assessing probative value - Whether potential for collusion is a matter of weight or admissibility - Whether propensity reasoning is a proper basis for admitting similar fact evidence.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Preuve - Preuve de faits similaires - Le témoignage de l’ancienne épouse relativement au comportement sexuel passé de l’intimé a été admis en preuve au procès de l’intimé pour agression sexuelle causant des lésions corporelles - La possibilité de collusion constitue-t-elle un facteur important pour l’appréciation de la valeur probante? - La possibilité de collusion constitue-t-elle une question de poids ou d’admissibilité? - Le raisonnement fondé sur la propension constitue-t-il un fondement acceptable pour l’admission d’une preuve de faits similaires?

10.10.2001

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

Kenneth Roydon Hibbert

v. (28021)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Criminal)(By Leave)

J.M. Peter Firestone and Catherine Tyhurst for the appellant.

Kate Ker for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Criminal Law - Procedural Law - Jury Charges - Identification Evidence - Alibis - Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no reversible error in trial judge’s instructions with respect to issue of identification - Whether curative proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C., c. C-46, should have been applied to erroneous instruction to jury that they could infer guilt from a false alibi.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Droit procédural - Directives au jury - Preuve d’identification - Alibis - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en concluant que le juge de première instance n’avait pas commis d’erreur donnant lieu à cassation dans ses directives au jury concernant la preuve d’identification? - La disposition réparatrice édictée au sous-al. 686(1)b)(iii) du Code criminel, L.R.C., ch. C‑46, aurait-elle dû être appliquée aux directives erronées présentées au jury, selon lequel il pouvait déduire d’un faux alibi que l’accusé était coupable?

10.10.2001

CORAM:               Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel JJ.

Ioannis Sarvanis

v. (27796)

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

 (F.C.)(Civil) (By Leave)

David R. Tensyen for the appellant.

David Sgayias and Christopher Rupar for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

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  - Appellant alleges that he was injured by the negligence of a federal government actor - Appellant 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 Appellant from suing the Crown in tort for the injuries he suffered.

Nature de la cause:

Lois - Interprétation - Responsabilité de l’État - Délits - Jugement sommaire - Loi sur la responsabilité civile de l’État et le contentieux administratif , L.R.C. (1985), ch. C‑50, art. 9  - L’appelant allègue avoir été blessé en raison de la négligence d’une personne agissant au nom de l’Administration fédérale - L’appelant reçoit des prestations d’invalidité en vertu du Régime de pensions du Canada - L’art. 9  de la Loi sur la responsabilité civile de l’État et le contentieux administratif  empêche-t-il l’appelant, qui reçoit des prestations d’invalidité, d’exercer un recours délictuel contre la Couronne pour les blessures qu’il a subies?

11.10.2001

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

Galérie d’art Yves Laroche Inc., et al.

c. (27872)

Claude Théberge (Qué.)(Civile)(Autorisation)

Marzia Frascadore et Vincent Chiara pour les appelants.

Louis Linteau pour l’intimé.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Property law - Procedure - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Civil - Copyright - Searches and seizures - Seizure before judgment - Legislation - Interpretation - Copyright infringement - Process of reproduction on canvas - Whether copyright is infringed upon within the meaning of the Copyright Act  if there is no  reproduction of a work - Whether a simple change of the backing of a work, in the instant case, in the transfer to canvas, constitutes a copyright infringement within the meaning of the Copyright Act  - Whether the legitimate and legal use of an authorized reproduction by a third person may be restricted by Respondent - Whether any alleged copyright infringement provided for in the Copyright Act  may give rise to a seizure under s. 38(1)  of the Copyright Act  - Whether the seizure before judgment carried out under s. 38(1)  of the Copyright Act , along with an “Anton Piller”order, contravenes s. 8  of the Charter  - Section 38(1)  of the Copyright Act , R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42 .

Nature de la cause:

Droit des biens - Procédure - Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Civil - Droit d’auteur - Fouilles et saisies - Saisie avant jugement - Législation - Interprétation - Contrefaçon - Procédé de reproduction sur toile - Peut-il y avoir de la contrefaçon au sens de la Loi sur le droit d’auteur  lorsqu’il n’y a aucune multiplication d’une oeuvre? -  Est-ce qu’un simple changement de support d’une oeuvre, en l’occurrence le transfert sur toile, peut constituer de la contrefaçon au sens de la Loi sur le droit d’auteur  ? -  Est-ce qu’un usage légitime et légal d’une reproduction autorisée par un tiers peut être restreint par le défendeur? -  Est-ce que toute présumée violation d’un droit d’auteur quelconque prévue à la Loi sur le droit d’auteur  peut donner ouverture à la saisie en vertu de l’art. 38(1)  de la Loi sur le droit d’auteur ? -   La saisie avant jugement pratiquée en vertu de l’art. 38(1)  de la Loi sur le droit d’auteur , accompagnée de l’ordonnance « Anton Piller », contrevient-elle à l’art. 8  de la Charte ? - Article 38(1)  de la Loi sur le droit d’auteur , L.R.C. 1985, c. C-42 .

11.10.2001

CORAM:               Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel JJ.

Autobus Thomas Inc.

c. (27804)

Sa Majesté la Reine (C.F.)(Civile)(Autorisation)

Daniel Bourgeois et Virginie April pour l’appelante.

Pierre Cossette et Marie-Andrée Legault pour l’intimée.

DISMISSED WITH COSTS /REJETÉ AVEC DÉPENS

Nature of the case:

Tax law - Commercial law - Capital of a corporation - Loan - Sale - Inventory financing- Line of credit - Instalment sales contract - “Loans and advances” - Real security - Transfer of money - Whether Appellant’s indebtedness in connection with the financing of its inventory of buses constitutes loans and advances under s. 181.2(3)(c) of the Income Tax Act - Whether Appellant’s indebtedness in connection with the financing of its inventory of buses constitutes indebtedness under s. 181.2(3)(d) of the Income Tax Act.

Nature de la cause:

Droit fiscal - Droit commercial - Capital d’une société - Prêt - Vente - Financement d’inventaires - Marge de crédit - Contrat de vente à tempérament - « Prêts et avances » - Sûreté réelle - Tradition d’argent - Les dettes de l’appelante reliées au financement d’inventaires d’autobus constituent-elles des prêts et avances en vertu de l’alinéa 181.2(3)c) de la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu? -  Les dettes de l’appelante reliées au financement d’inventaires d’autobus constituent-elles des dettes visées par l’alinéa 181.2(3)d) de la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu?

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

- 2001 -

- 2002 -