Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

April 6, 2001  602 - 678                                                                         le 6 avril 2001

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Body Rubs of Ontario Inc.

Gabrielle K. Kramer

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

v. (28450)

The Corporation of the City of Vaughan (Ont.)

Olivio Fatigati

The Corporation of the City of Vaughan

FILING DATE 9.3.2001

Georges Asselin

Sean T. McGee

Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP

c. (28462)

Procureur général du Canada (Ministre des Transports) (C.F.)

Jan Brongers

Procureur générale du Canada

DATE DE PRODUCTION 16.3.2001

Denis Brazeau

Denis Brazeau

c. (28459)

Gérard Guay, et al. (Qué.)

Bernard Faribault

DATE DE PRODUCTION 16.3.2001

Jack Marks, Chief of Police of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Police Force, et al.

Edward A. Ayers, Q.C.

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

v. (28464)

Michael Oniel (Ont.)

Michael Oniel

FILING DATE 16.3.2001

Charles Ferenczi

Charles Ferenczi

v. (28465)

Canada Trustco Mortgage Company, et al. (Ont.)

Howard W. Reininger

Turkstra, Mazza, Reininger

FILING DATE 19.3.2001

APRIL 2, 2001 / LE 2 AVRIL 2001

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (28386)

M.A.M. (Crim.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Child witnesses - Unsworn testimony - Whether it was open to the trial judge to conclude that the complainant could testify upon giving a promise to tell the truth

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Dr. Bernard Lyons

v. (28254)

Dr. Joseph Multari (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour Law - Employment Contracts - Non-competition clauses - Employment contract prohibits competition after termination for three years and within five miles of place of business - Whether covenant enforceable.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

698114 Alberta Ltd.

v. (28209)

The Town of Banff, Randall McKay, in his capacity as Manager of Planning and Development for the Town of Banff, and the Municipal Planning Commission of the Town of Banff (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Municipal law - Development permits - Land use bylaws - Administrative law - Prerogative writs - Mandamus - Applicant’s request for development permit refused by Town of Banff - Whether applicant for development permit entitled to have application decided on basis of zoning and land use bylaws applicable at date application was filed or whether municipality may apply a subsequently enacted bylaw to deny application - Whether section 9 of Bylaw 31-3, which provides that applications for development permits may not be made until a developer has accumulated a sufficient number of development credits through a lottery or random draw allocation scheme, is authorized under the Municipal Government Act. S.A. 1994, c. M-26.1.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Kurt Felker

v. (28215)

Sherman Cunningham and Electro Source Inc. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Wrongful dismissal - Applicant hired by respondents as senior sales manager - Applicant  pursued other employment opportunity to represent an electronics manufacturer as a client of his own corporation, while employed with respondent - Applicant did not disclose this activity to employer or seek consent - Employment  terminated without notice - Is there any obligation on an employee to advise the employer that he or she is considering looking for alternate employment or an alternate opportunity? -   What is the scope of an employee’s duty to devote his or her “full time, ability and energy” to the employment? - When a company rejects an opportunity, can an employee of the company pursue the opportunity on his or her behalf, absent the consent of the employer, without breaching the duties owed to the company and without risking summary dismissal? - If the obligations discussed above are found to exist, do they apply equally to fiduciary and non-fiduciary employees? 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Gerard McKenna

v. (28222)

Henry McAllister Lang (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Civil Procedure - Jury Trial - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of Rule 52.08(1)(c) of the Rules of Civil Procedure as only permitting a jury verdict to be set aside in the complete absence of evidence as opposed to an absence of evidence that could reasonably lead to a jury’s conclusion - Whether the Court of appeal erred in reserving solely to appellate courts the jurisdiction of determining the “perversity” or “unreasonableness” of a jury’s verdict - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in arbitrarily attributing a particular amount of the settlement to lost employment income in the absence of any such attribution by the jury - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not considering the requirements under section 68  of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act  when awarding the Respondent judgment - Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194 - Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, s. 68 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Salma Siddiqui

v. (28300)

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Trish Dyer, Peter Van Dusen, David Melvill, Hector Almendrades, Bytown Travel Limited and Monique Doré (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Civil Procedure - Limitations - Libel and Slander - Statute limits actions for libel in a newspaper or in a broadcast - Action dismissed - Whether notice requirements apply to non-media defendants- Whether individual defendants employed by media corporation can be served in the same manner as the corporation - Whether Court has the discretion to cure a technical irregularity in the service of a notice of defamation - How specific must the defamed person be in providing notice.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel

Warren James Jarvis

v. (28378)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Income tax - Search and seizure - Right to remain silent - Whether Revenue Canada can use its administrative powers under s. 231.1 and 231.2 of the Income Tax Act to pursue an investigation against a taxpayer suspected of committing an offence under the Act without infringing the taxpayer’s rights under s. 7  and s. 8  of the Charter 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

February 25, 1997

Alberta Provincial Court

(Fradsham P.C.J.)

Ruling on the Voir Dire: Evidence obtained by Respondents excluded under s. 24(2)  of Charter 

Acquittal: Income tax evasion (s. 239)

Sa Majesté la Reine

c. (28322)

Michel Otis (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Droit criminel - Droit au silence - Déclaration incriminante - Admissibilité -  La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en concluant que la poursuite de l’interrogatoire de l’intimé constituait une violation de son droit au silence? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en rejetant les aveux de l’intimé, au motif de l’effondrement émotionnel de l’intimé, alors que les facteurs d’un climat d’oppression étaient absents?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Jean‑Robert Gauthier

c. (28236)

Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes, et le Procureur général du Canada, Association canadienne des radiodiffuseurs, Association canadienne de télévision par câble, Videotron Communications Inc., Cogeco Câble Canada Inc., l'Association de la télévision spécialisée et payante, Action réseau consommateurs, Astral, Télé‑Québec, Association des producteurs de films et de télévision du Québec, Pierre de Savoye, et Roland Saumure (C.F.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif  -  Révision judiciaire  - Radiodiffusion  -  La Cour d’appel fédérale refuse sans motifs la demande de révision judiciaire  -  La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré dans l’exercice de son pouvoir discrétionnaire ?  -  Le CRTC a-t-il commis une erreur de droit en refusant d’acquiescer à la demande de TVOntario ? - Les questions soulevées dans la présente demande méritent-elles considération par la Cour suprême du Canada -  Loi sur la radiodiffusion , L.C. 1991, ch. 11, al. 9(1) h).

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

André Prud’homme, Gilles Prud’homme, Jean‑Paul Fortin,

André Fortin et Savino Cantatore

c. (28117)

Fernand Prud’homme (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés   -  Liberté d’expression  - Diffamation - Défenses et limites - Droit à la dissidence - Charte québécoise des droits et libertés  - Atteinte à la réputation  - Droit à l’information - Procédure - Principes régissant l’intervention d’une cour d’appel - Couronne -  Immunités et privilèges - Immunité d’un Conseiller municipal  - Charte québécoise des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q. c. C-12, art. 3, 4, 5, 44, 49 - Code civil du Québec,  L.Q. 1991, c. 64, art. 3, 35, 1457.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Rénald Fortin

c. (28149)

Compagnie d'Assurance Wellington

- et -

Les Assurances Bélanger Lajeunesse Inc. (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure  -  Preuve  -  Admission de “nouvelle preuve” en appel  -  Responsabilité civile  -  Délit intentionnel  -  Indemnité d’assurance  -  Requête en rejet d’appel dilatoire ou abusif  -  La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en refusant d’admettre le nouveau rapport d’expert quant à la fournaise?  - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en accueillant la requête en rejet d’appel, concluant que l’appel n’avait aucune chance de succès et était voué à l’échec?  -  Le juge de première instance a-t-il erré dans son appréciation des faits et de la crédibilité des témoins?  -  Code civil du Québec, L.Q. 1991, c. 64, art. 2464  -  Code de procédure civile du Québec, L.R.Q., c. C-25, par. 501(5), art. 509.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Léonildo Pirès

c. (28139)

André L. Monty, avocat, le Tribunal des professions

et le Comité de discipline du Barreau du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure civile  -  Appel  -  Droit administratif  -  Erreur manifestement déraisonnable  -  Droit des professions  -  Avocat  -   La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en rejetant l’appel du demandeur?  -  Le Tribunal des professions et la Cour supérieure du Québec ont-ils erré en refusant la révision judiciaire?  -  Le Comité de discipline du Barreau du Québec a-t-il commis une erreur manifestement déraisonnable en acquittant l’avocat intimé?  -  Code des professions, L.R.Q. c. C-26, art. 128; Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q., c. C-25, art. 501.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie

Wayne Budd, Lois Budd and Wayne Budd Incorporated

v. (28389)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Mutual legal assistance - Search and seizure - Standard of review of a search warrant - Whether the reviewing judge should have been able to consider de novo whether he would have exercised his discretion to issue the warrants, in light of the admitted breaches of the Applicants’ Charter rights and consequential excisions and deletions of the Information to Obtain the warrants

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Ernest Caron

v. (28290)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Prisons - Compensation - Damages - Prisoner suspended from work pending determination of guilt of infraction of prison regulations - Second decision made which ignored first decision and dismissed prisoner from work - Charges later withdrawn - Whether Federal Court of Appeal erred: (1) in ignoring Applicant’s claim and substituting another never made by the Applicant; (2) in treating damages incurred as negligence when they were in fact fully intentional; (3) by refusing to hear the applicant with respect to falsity of a witness’ testimony; (4) in concluding that Applicant was responsible for the aggravation of the damages; (5) in accepting conclusions of the trial judge and yet reversing his decisions; and, (6) in refusing to clarify an alleged breach of proceedings.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Corporacion Transnacional de Inversiones, S.A. de C.V., Corporacion Interamericana de Telecomunicationes, S.A. de C.V., Domos Corporacion, S.A., de C.V., Corporacion de Inversiones y Commercializacion, S.A., de C.V. and Javier Garza Calderon

v. (28237)

STET International, S.p.A. and STET International Netherlands, N.V. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Contracts - International commercial arbitration - UNCITRAL Model Law - Ontario Courts uphold decision of Arbitration Tribunal of International Chamber of Commerce awarding damages for breach of subscription agreement - Whether conflict with international appellate jurisprudence - Whether misplaced deference to arbitral process - Whether applicants denied equal treatment and full opportunity to present case by being denied access to documents or evidence from Cuban witnesses - Whether Courts improperly refused to exercise remedial jurisdiction to order proper hearing.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Canadian Newspapers Company Limited, The Globe and Mail, a division of Canadian Newspapers Limited, A. Roy Megarry, William Thorsell, Timothy Pritchard and Jock Ferguson

v. (28136)

Robert Hodgson (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Libel and slander - Damages - Appeals - What is the appropriate standard of review by appellate courts of damage awards for defamation made by a judge sitting without a jury? - Should a defendant in a defamation case be held liable for damages which result from the independent act of a statutory body in making a determination which has an adverse impact on the plaintiff?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Advanced Management Enterprises Limited

v. (28173)

Pate's Variety Inc. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Alleged condition precedent - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overruling the trial judge by finding that an oral condition precedent to a written agreement of purchase and sale for land was not the subject of agreement between the parties.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Bank of Montreal

v. (28224)

Korico Enterprises Limited, Issam Awad, Wadih Khoury, Claude Awad and Silva Khoury (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Creditor and Debtor - Sureties - Personal guarantees of indebtedness - Whether a clause in a personal guarantee of debt permitting the creditor to deal with secured assets as it sees fit permits an improvident sale - Rights and obligations of sureties.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

APRIL 6, 2001 / LE 6 AVRIL 2001

27467                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE ‑ v. ‑ RANJIT CHEEMA, NARAYAN SALIENDRA (ALSO KNOWN AS SALIENDRA NARAYAN), TROY LORENZ (B.C.) (Criminal)

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

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Extradition - Whether the learned Judge erred in law, and exceeded her jurisdiction, in making a pre-hearing disclosure order directing the production of documents and/or information to assist the Respondents in creating a record for possible subsequent review by the Minister of Justice - Whether the learned Judge erred in law, and exceeded her jurisdiction, in ordering the Applicants to explain the reasons for their respective actions.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27862                    E.S. ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

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

Criminal law - Pre-trial procedure - Jurors - Challenge for cause - Whether offence-based challenge for cause is permitted in cases of charges of sexual offences against children and, if so, in what circumstances and what format should be followed in conducting the challenge for cause - Whether the decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in R. v. Betker was overruled by this Court in R. v. Williams, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1128

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28303                    GILLIAN GUESS ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (B.C.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache 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 - Offences - Procedural law - Charge to the jury - Whether the trial judge erred in his charge to the jury with respect to the actus reus and mens rea of the offence of attempting to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice - Whether the trial judge erred in his charge to the jury with respect to reasonable doubt - Whether the trial judge erred in ordering the accused excluded from proceedings relating to her trial - Whether the Applicant’s rights under sections 11 (d) and 7  of the Charter were infringed.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28330                    MANUEL MONTECATINE ‑ c. ‑ SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE (Qué.) (Criminelle)

CORAM:               Le Juge en chef et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve - Crédibilité - Est-ce que le jugement de culpabilité sur le chef de voie de fait est déraisonnable pour cause d’incompatibilité vu l’acquittement sur le chef de harcèlement pour doute raisonnable?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 1 novembre 1999

Cour du Québec

(Parent j.c.q.)

Demandeur acquitté sur chef de harcèlement et déclaré coupable sur chef de voie de fait, contrairement à l’article 266b)  du Code criminel 

28202                    CORRPRO CANADA INC. ‑ v. ‑ EDMONTON CENTRE WEST LTD., OXFORD PROPERTIES CANADA LIMITED, TRUSCAN PROPERTY CORPORATION, ECW LEASEHOLDS LTD., THE EDMONTON CENTRE LIMITED AND OXFORD DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC. (Alta.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Limitation of actions - Torts - Negligence - Injury to property - Defendant applying to dismiss action on basis that it was barred by s. 51(f) of the Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. L-15 - Whether allegation that negligent design of cathode protection system failed to prevent further corrosion of reinforced concrete slabs constitutes an allegation of “injury to real property” directly or indirectly arising from an extrinsic act.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28184                    NO. 1 COLLISION REPAIR & PAINTING (1982) LTD. ‑ v. ‑ INSURANCE CORPORATION OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, ROBERT BROWNLEE, GORDON PARSONS, DEREK VETTESE, STACEY BERNIER, RICHARD FISTER AND NEIL WEATHERSTON (B.C.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for an oral hearing and the application for leave to appeal are dismissed.

La demande d’audition orale et la demande d’autorisation d’appel sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Intentional Torts - Commercial Law - Contracts - History of conflict between Crown corporation with provincial monopoly to insure automobile owners and repair shop that bills its customers at rates exceeding those approved by Crown corporation - Crown corporation engages in deliberate course of conduct that includes illegally withholding payments due to repair shop - Conduct results in significant hardship and losses to repair shop and sale of business - Whether insurer acted lawfully in using statutory powers and monopoly position to intentionally inflict economic injury - Whether judgments below achieved an otherwise unavailable limitation on insurer’s liability - Whether error to conclude that the insurer’s obligations are limited - Whether error not to find unreasonable and unlawful restraint of trade.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28154                    HOECHST CELANESE CORPORATION, E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, SHELL OIL COMPANY ‑ v. ‑ JEAN‑MICHEL FURLAN, DONALD ATKINSON, RUSSELL D. REID, MARK ZWANSKI, GREV GREY AND KIRSTEN WILLIAMS (B.C.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed with costs.

Les demandes d’autorisation d’appel sont rejetées avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Civil Procedure ‑ Courts ‑ Jurisdiction ‑ Pre‑trial procedure ‑ Service ex juris -  Appropriate criteria for assessing when a trial court may assume jurisdiction under “real and substantial connection” test ‑ Whether principles of order and fairness require a plaintiff to adduce evidence of a good arguable case against a foreign defendant who challenges the jurisdiction of the court - Morguard Investments Ltd. v. De Savoye, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1077 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28183                    BERNARD C. TANNER ‑ v. ‑ J.D. BRUCE MCDONALD, BENNETT JONES, THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ALBERTA, DR. PATRICK F. CONWAY, DR. PAUL REYNOLDS, DR. ROLAND F. LYNCH, CALGARY REGIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITY, METRO‑CALGARY AND RURAL GENERAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 93 (ALSO KNOWN AS CALGARY REGIONAL DISTRICT GROUP) AND HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL (Alta.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Gonthier and Binnie JJ.

The application for an extension of time is granted, the motion to adduce new evidence is dismissed and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to Dr. Patrick F. Conway, Dr. Paul Reynolds, Dr. Roland F. Lynch,  J.D. Bruce McDonald and Bennett Jones.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée, la demande pour déposer de nouveaux éléments de preuve est rejetée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur du Dr. Patrick F. Conway, Dr. Paul Reynolds, Dr. Roland F. Lynch,  J.D. Bruce McDonald et Bennett Jones.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Appeals - Fresh evidence - Test for admission of fresh evidence after order for summary judgment - Limitation of actions - Fraudulent concealment - Effect of fraudulent concealment on application of limitation period

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28255                    PAUL CREEK ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (B.C.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Unreasonable verdict - Whether the verdict was reasonable and supported by the evidence

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28424                    EVANGELINE GODRON ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Sask.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache 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

Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal law - Public nudity - Mischief - Defences - Colour of right - Whether prohibiting women from being topless in a public place for a non-commercial and non-sexual purpose is discrimination based on sex and therefore contrary to s. 15(1)  of the Charter - Whether s. 429(2) (Defence to Mischief offence) is unconstitutional in that it places an evidentiary burden upon an accused in order to establish a legal justification or excuse and colour of right thereby violating the presumption of innocence as contained in the Charter - Whether s. 429(2) requires an accused to make out legal justification or excuse and colour of right or whether any of these three defences is sufficient - Whether the colour of right defence is made out where the accused is honestly mistaken in law or whether this defence is restricted to mistake of fact - Whether a societal interest and/or policy reason must be satisfied before the colour of right defence can succeed - Whether there are conflicting authorities concerning a woman’s right to be topless in public

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28350                    MARJAN AGHAIPOUR ‑ v. ‑ NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA, ROLAND HOME IMPROVEMENTS LIMITED AND ROLAND KARL FILZMAIER, LAURENTIAN BANK OF CANADA AS TRUSTEE FOR RRSP 28A‑11571 (PAUL EZRIN) (Ont.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the National Bank of Canada and the Laurentian Bank of Canada as trustee for RRSP 28A-11571 (Paul Ezrin).

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de la Banque Nationale du Canada et de la Banque Laurentienne du Canada en tant qu’administratrice du REÉR 28A-11571 (Paul Ezrin).

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Civil Procedure - Contempt of Court - Applicant found in contempt - Whether court has a positive duty to consider statutory context of an order when adjudicating upon contempt - Standard of review of contempt orders - Whether Court of Appeal failed to properly base its judgement on terms of original order and statutory context.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28175                    McCALL PONTIAC BUICK LTD. ‑ v. ‑ REID HAMER‑JACKSON (B.C.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Commercial law - Wrongful dismissal - Whether the principle pronounced by this Court in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701 applies to events occurring after the dismissal of an employee - What distinctions between aggravated damages, punitive damages and the increased damages are permitted by the principle enunciated in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. - Whether it is a proper exercise of judicial discretion to award special costs in circumstances where the litigant had already been punished for the same conduct in an award of aggravated, punitive or increased damages - Whether a litigant who has effectively mitigated the loss occurring from loss of employment can voluntarily terminate the mitigation and resume a claim for damages against the prior employer.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28258                    MICHEL COTNOIR ‑ c. ‑ SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE (Qué.) (Criminelle)

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

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  - Droit criminel - Preuve - Fouille abusive - Le juge de la Cour supérieure et la majorité de la Cour d’appel ont-ils erré en droit en intervenant sur une question de faits ou une question mixte de faits et de droit, à savoir la conclusion du juge de procès à l’effet que les policiers n’avaient aucun motif raisonnable, ni même de soupçons leur permettant de croire à la commission d’une infraction - Ces derniers ont-ils erré en droit en concluant que les policiers peuvent pénétrer sur la propriété privée et résidentielle d’un individu et procéder à sa détention dans le but d’enquêter sur un vol, en l’absence de motifs raisonnables de croire ou, à la rigueur de soupçonner la commission d’une telle infraction - Subsidiairement, en cas de violation des droits reconnus par les articles 8 et 9 de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés , les juges majoritaires de la Cour d’appel ont erré en droit en concluant à la non-exclusion des éléments de preuve obtenus, malgré l’absence d’erreur manifeste et/ou de conclusion déraisonnable de la part du juge de première instance à ce sujet.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 14 novembre 1996

Cour du Québec (chambre criminelle et

pénale)

(St-Pierre j.c.q.)    

Demandeur acquitté d’accusations en vertu des articles 253a) , 253b)  et 255(2)  du Code criminel 

28233                    JEAN‑DANIEL ONDO ‑ c. ‑ SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE (Ont.) (Criminelle)

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

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve - Élément constitutif de l’infraction - Corruption - Procédure lors de l’appel - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en ne se prononçant pas sur toutes les questions de fait et de droit soulevées par le demandeur? - Les éléments constitutifs de l’infraction de corruption sont-ils présents? - Les droits de l’accusé lors de procédures judiciaires ont-ils été respectés? - Les règles de divulgation de la preuve ont-elles été respectées? - Les critères d’admissibilité de la preuve ont-ils été respectés?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

28018                    DEZSO KADAR ‑ v. ‑ GABRIELLA KADAR (Ont.) (Civil)

CORAM:               L'Heureux‑Dubé, Arbour 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

Torts - Intentional torts - Assault and battery - Damages - Procedural law - Limitations of actions - Costs - Charge to jury - Whether action limited by Limitations Act - Application of discoverability rule - Whether jury verdict perverse - Whether damages award excessive - Whether misdirection to jury warrants new trial - Whether costs award warrants interference.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28001                    DAME ELHAM AZAR ‑ c. ‑ ZURICH DU CANADA COMPAGNIE D'INDEMNITÉ  (Qué.) (Civile)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Arbour 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 – Assurances – Réclamation auprès de l’assureur pour la perte totale d’un édifice commercial à la suite d’un incendie – La demanderesse servait-elle de prête-nom pour son mari? – Le mari de la demanderesse était-il l’âme dirigeante des opérations commerciales de la demanderesse? – Les actes posés par le mari de la demanderesse sont-ils opposables à la demanderesse? – Identification du risque – Demande d’annulation de la police d’assurance pour motif de fausses déclarations et mauvaise représentation du risque.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

27988                    DEMIX, DIVISION DE CIMENT ST‑LAURENT (INDÉPENDANT) INC. ‑ c. ‑ COMMUNAUTÉ URBAINE DE MONTRÉAL, VILLE DE MONTRÉAL‑EST (Qué.) (Civile)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Arbour 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 municipal – Fiscalité municipale – Évaluation foncière – La demanderesse occupe un terrain où elle y exploite une carrière de pierre concassée et une usine de ciment – Loi sur la fiscalité municipale, L.R.Q., c. F-2.1, art. 46 – La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit dans son interprétation de l’article 46 de la Loi sur la fiscalité municipale?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

28039                    BISCUITS LECLERC LTÉE ‑ c. ‑ COMPAGNIE D'ASSURANCE‑VIE TRANSAMÉRICA OCCIDENTAL (Qué.) (Civile)

CORAM:               Les juges L'Heureux‑Dubé, Arbour 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  - Législation  - Interprétation  -  Assurances  -   Changement dans l’assurabilité du risque  -   Si l’assuré d’une police d’assurance-vie est à son insu atteint d’une maladie mortelle lors de la signature de la proposition d’assurance, et s’il est toujours atteint de la même maladie mortelle lors de l’acceptation de la proposition et du paiement de la première prime, y a-t-il eu un changement dans son assurabilité ?  -  Est-ce que la connaissance de cette maladie mortelle acquise par l’assuré ou le preneur après l’acceptation de la proposition mais avant le paiement de la première prime constitue un changement dans l’assurabilité du risque ?  -  Article 2516 C.c.B.-C.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

28239                    PETER PENNETT ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ‑ and between ‑ CLINTON VICTOR SUZACK ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

The applications for extension of time are granted and the applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.

Les demandes de prorogation de délai sont accordées et les demandes d’autorisation d’appel sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Whether the trial judge erred in instructing the jury as to the use to be made of the co-accused’s disposition for violence - Whether the trial judge erred in giving the jury a Vetrovec warning in relation to evidence of witnesses called for the defence - Whether the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that flight could be used as evidence of consciousness of guilt of murder - Whether the trial judge erred in excluding exculpatory statements - Trial procedure - Severance - Whether the trial judge erred by refusing the Applicant’s motion for severance - Whether the trial judge adequately instructed the jury on the permissible use of evidence of the Applicant’s “bad character” that had been adduced by his co-accused -Causation - Parties to the offence - Whether the jury had been properly instructed on the issues of causation and the doctrine of co-perpetration - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Whether s.635(2) of the Criminal   Code  violates ss.7  and 11 (d) of the Charter

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28291                    RICHARD MARTIN BEDARD ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for extension of time is granted, the request for an oral hearing and the application for leave to appeal are dismissed.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée,  la demande d'audition orale et la demande d’autorisation d'appel sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Criminal - Criminal Law - Evidence - Procedure - Applicant convicted in part based on admissions to police detective and videotaped confessions - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law by depriving applicant of videotape - Whether incompleteness of trial transcript was prejudicial - Whether error to hold that breach of s. 15 (1)  or 12  of the Charter would not violate ss. 7  or 11  (d)  - Whether determination of denial of full answer and defence required demonstration of prejudice or is dependant on the strength of the case - Whether a process, form or procedure, whereby an institutional inmate can petition a Court for a hearing, is required for s. 12  of the Charter - Whether improper or continual denial of witnesses, especially expert medical testimony, constituted denial of full answer and defence - Whether denial of witnesses who previously testified for Crown constitutes denial of full answer and defence - Whether pre-conference ruling included evidence regarding the issue of full answer and defence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28360                    DAVINDER SINGH ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for extension of time is granted, all ancillary motions are denied and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée, les requêtes accessoires sont rejetées et la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Whether the Applicant’s second trial is barred by ss. 11 (b), (d), (h), 7  and 15  of the Charter - Whether ss. 271 and 274 of the Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 , are unconstitutional - Whether the Applicant’s right to trial in a reasonable delay has been infringed?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

December 14, 1998

Superior Court of Justice

(Farley, J.)

Applicant’s application writs of prohibition, mandamus, and certiorari dismissed

28177                    EDGEWORTH CONSTRUCTION LTD. ‑ v. ‑ THURBER CONSULTANTS LTD. (B.C.) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie 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 - Limitation of actions - Statutes - Interpretation - Running of time postponed - Defendant in action applying for order that action was statute-barred - Plaintiff arguing that it was entitled to postponement of running of limitation period - Whether Court of Appeal erred in deciding that limitation period was not postponed for professional negligence resulting in economic loss to correct a “dangerous design” - Whether Court of Appeal erred in deciding that limitation period was not postponed for negligent misrepresentation resulting in economic loss - Limitation Act,  R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 236, s. 6.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28169                    DR. NORMAN SUTHERLAND ‑ v. ‑ MURIELLE FORGET (Ont.) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on a party and party basis.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens sur la base partie-partie.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Civil procedure - Motion to strike pleadings - Legislative provision provides that  no report, document or thing prepared for or statement given at a proceeding under certain health professions statutes is admissible in a civil proceeding - Whether statutory privilege prevented the Applicant from pleading and proving the documents where the documents were used in furtherance of a fraudulent scheme to extort money - Whether the doctrine of absurdity applies where there is no ambiguity in the wording of the statutory provision - Whether doctrine of absurdity is applicable where the plain meaning of the provision would allow a person to commit a fraud on the court and serve to deny a party the right to make full answer and defence - Whether the decision of the majority of the Court of Appeal creates a “dangerous precedent” which confuses the substantive adequacy of pleading with admissibility of evidence at trial, precluding the Applicant from making full answer and defence to the Respondent’s claim - Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 18, s. 36(3)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28170                    WAYNE E. STRONG ‑ v. ‑ MR. NEIL M. KISBEE, ESTATE TRUSTEE FOR THE ESTATE OF MICHELINE M. PAQUET ‑ and between ‑ WAYNE E. STRONG ‑ v. ‑ GENERAL MOTORS OF CANADA LIMITED (Ont.) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie 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

Torts - Damages -  Sexual assault - Wrongful dismissal - Defamation - Procedural law - Limitation of actions - Employee dismissed because of alleged sexual assault - Trial judge dismissing employee’s actions for defamation and wrongful dismissal - Trial judge also dismissing counterclaim for damages for sexual assault - Whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding trial judge’s dismissal of claim for wrongful dismissal - Whether Court of Appeal erred in allowing cross-appeal and awarding damages for sexual assault.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28019                    CORRINE GODIN ‑ v. ‑ PREMIER SALON INTERNATIONAL INC., MAGIC CUTS HAIR SALON INC. AND GAÉTANNE THÉRIAULT (N.B.) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Evidence - Plaintiff falling after rising to leave her chair at a hairdressing salon - Whether trial judge erred in assessing discovery evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27635                    WILLIAM FOOK WAH LIM ‑ v. ‑ HONG KEE LIM (B.C.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

The motion for reconsideration is dismissed.

La demande de réexamen est rejetée.

27701                    ARLETTE JUMELLE ‑ c. ‑ ROBERT MAXWELL SOLOWAY (Man.) (Civile)

CORAM:               Les juges Gonthier, Binnie et Arbour

La demande de réexamen est rejetée avec dépens.

The motion for reconsideration is dismissed with costs.

27.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum and book of authorities of the respondent Robert J. Hobart

Mary Francis Cooper

v. (27880)

Robert J. Hobart, et al. (B.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intimé Robert J. Hobart

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time to serve and file the respondent’s factum extended to February 23, 2001.

Time to serve and file the respondent’s book of authorities extended to March 7, 2001.

27.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the appellant’s book of authorities

Alfred Dutra

v. (27831)

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

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’appelant

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to February 28, 2001, nunc pro tunc.

29.3.2001

Before / Devant:  BINNIE J.

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

Angelina Codina

v. (28434)

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

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to February 19, 2001.

29.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the applicant's reply, motion to exempt applicant from payment of filing fee and motion to file a memorandum of argument on leave to appeal of over 20 pages

Cordell F. Becker

v. (28415)

Director of Employment Standards of Alberta, et al. (Alta.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la réplique du requérant, requête visant à dispenser le requérant de payer les honoraires de dépôt et requête pour permission de déposer un mémoire sur une demande d'autorisation de plus de 20 pages

GRANTED IN PART / ACCORDÉE EN PARTIE    Time extended to April 12, 2001.  The motion for exemption of filing fees is granted.  The motion to file a memorandum of argument of 26 pages in support of the application for leave to appeal is granted.

29.3.2001

Before /Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to file a memorandum of argument on leave to appeal of over 20 pages

3360652 Canada Inc. (faisant affaires sous le nom de Itsus International)

c. (28430)

Alexis Jewellery & Accessories Inc. (Qué.)

Requête pour permission de déposer un mémoire sur une demande d'autorisation de plus de 20 pages

DISMISSED / REJETÉE    La requête pour obtenir une ordonnance autorisant la demanderesse de produire un mémoire de 37 pages au soutien de la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

30.3.2001

Before / Devant:  BINNIE J.

Motion for directions

Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc.

v. (28406)

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW - Canada), et al. (Sask.) 2001 SCC 22 / 2001 CSC 22

Demande pour obtenir des directives

The Attorney General of Saskatchewan seeks an order directing the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority to serve the Attorney General of Saskatchewan with the application for leave to appeal in this matter.  Rule 23(10) provides that

“an applicant shall serve the application for leave on the parties in the courts below and shall file the application for leave with the Registrar within the time set out in para. 58 (1) (a) sub.-sec.58 (2) of the Act or as extended pursuant to sub-section 59 (1) of the Act. [emphasis added]

Rule 1 defines a party to include “an intervener unless the text provides otherwise or unless the context does not so permit”.  Section 8 of the Constitutional Questions Act R.S.S.  1978 c. - 29 provides in sub-s. 9 that where the Attorney General for Saskatchewan appears in a proceeding before a court in Saskatchewan in respect to a Constitutional Question “he is a party for the purposes of appeal from an adjudication therein respecting the validity or applicability of a law or respecting entitlement to a remedy”.

There is no doubt that the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. was required to serve the Attorney General of Saskatchewan with the leave application to this court.  Accordingly an order will go directing the applicant Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. to serve the Attorney General for Saskatchewan with the application for leave to appeal and any other materials that the applicant may subsequently file in this matter, and permitting the Attorney General for Saskatchewan to file his response within thirty days from the date of such service.

The Attorney General of Saskatchewan is entitled to his costs of this motion in any event of the cause.

30.3.2001

Before / Devant:  BINNIE J.

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

Robert Walton

v. (28187)

Anna Walton (Ont.)

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

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

The applicant seeks an extension of time within which to file his application for leave to appeal.  In his action he claims that the respondent Anna Walton made false statements to the Hamilton-Wentworth police in June 1992 that resulted in a criminal charge being brought against him.  He says “these false allegations” formed the basis of court proceedings which the co-respondent Richard W. Shields, a lawyer practising in the city of Hamilton, conducted on her behalf. 

The applicant's action was struck out by Order of Dandie J. on May 19,1999 because “the amended statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action”.  The Applicant sought to appeal this decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal.  At that stage, the respondents moved for security of costs and obtained an order from Weiler J.A. on October 5, 1999 ordering the Applicant to post security for the respondents' costs in the amount of $8,500.00 on or before October 20, 1999 failing which the Respondents would be at liberty to move to have the appeal dismissed.  The order of Weiler J.A. was not complied with.  The Respondents moved for judgment. By Order dated December 23, 1999 Charron J.A. dismissed the Applicant's motion to  vary the order for security of costs and granted the Respondents' motion to dismiss the appeal.  The Order of Charron J.A. was subsequently confirmed by a three judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal by Order dated June 4, 2000.  The Applicant, who is self-represented, now seeks an extension of time to appeal to this Court. 

While the merits of the proposed appeal are not before me as such, it is appropriate to look at whether the Applicant's material shows “an arguable case” for the granting of leave before an extension is granted.  (See Robertson v. R. 2 December 1982; Pieszkor v. R. 7 September 1988 and Gagné v. Lacelle 28 May 1986).  Not only is the Applicant in continuing default of the Order for security of costs granted by Madame Justice Weiler on October 5, 1999, but I see nothing in the material that would justify on the merits an extension of time for the purpose of further pursuing this  claim against the Respondents.  Enough is enough.

The Applicant says that he was misled about the relevant time limits by an unidentified source at (or obtained through) the British Columbia Lawyer Referral Service.  Accepting this to be the case, and that a genuine error occurred, the fact remains that the Applicant's material  shows no arguable case for the granting of leave.  Section 40 (1) requires a demonstration that the case involves a question of  “public importance” of such  a nature or significance as to warrant consideration by The Supreme Court of Canada.  It is not even arguable that the Applicant's case meets this standard.

The application is dismissed.

2.4.2001

Before / Devant:  L’HEUREUX-DUBÉ J.

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

Daniel Joseph Innocente

v. (28207)

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

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to April 15, 2001.

2.4.2001

Before / Devant:  ARBOUR J.

Further order on motion for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Attorney General of Canada

Squamish Indian Band

IN/DANS:              Osoyoos Indian Band

v. (27408)

The Town of Oliver, et al. (B.C.)

Autre ordonnance sur une requête en autorisation d'intervention

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the Attorney General of Canada and the Squamish Indian Band for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the order of November 8, 2000 thereon;

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said interveners are granted permission to present oral argument at the hearing of the appeal not to exceed the time allowed respectively to each of them as follows:

-               The Attorney General of Canada:                                                     15 minutes

-               The Squamish Indian Band                                                                15 minutes

21.3.2001

Rashid Aziz

v. (27824)

United Used Auto & Truck Parts Ltd., et al.  (B.C.)

(Appeal)