Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

March 23, 2001  529 - 563                                                                  le 23 mars 2001

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Eli Lilly & Company, et al.

Anthony G. Creber

Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP

v. (28382)

Apotex Inc., et al. (F.C.)

Harry Radomski

Goodmans LLP

FILING DATE 19.2.2001

Her Majesty the Queen

William F. Ehrcke, Q.C.

A.G. of British Columbia

v. (28443)

Rajinder Kumar Benji (B.C.)

Peter Leask, Q.C.

Leask Bahen

FILING DATE 27.2.2001

Kyle Brendon Stroshein

Morris P. Bodnar, Q.C.

Bodnar, Wanhella & Cutforth

v. (28392)

Her Majesty the Queen (Sask.)

Eric J. Neufeld, Q.C.

A.G. for Saskatchewan

FILING DATE 28.2.2001

Yvonne Jacqueline Daley

Yvonne Jacqueline Daley

v. (28444)

Deston Osmond Daley (Ont.)

Deston Osmond Daley

FILING DATE 1.3.2001

MARCH 19, 2001 / LE 19 MARS 2001

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache

Paul Creek

v. (28255)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

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

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Evangeline Godron

v. (28424)

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

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

Marjan Aghaipour

v. (28350)

National Bank of Canada AND Roland Home Improvements Limited and Roland Karl Filzmaier AND Laurentian Bank of Canada as Trustee for RRSP 28A‐11571 (Paul Ezrin) (Ont.)

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

McCall Pontiac Buick Ltd.

v. (28175)

Reid Hamer‐Jackson (B.C.)

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

Roderick Macdonell

c. (28092)

Procureur général du Québec et Assemblée Nationale (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit constitutionnel – Protection du processus décisionnel des membres de l’Assemblée nationale du Québec – Accès à l’information – Législation – Loi sur l’accès aux documents des organismes publics et sur la protection des renseignements personnels, L.R.Q., c. a-2.1 – Interprétation des exceptions au principe général de l’accès aux documents des organismes publics – Qu’est-ce qu’un document préparé pour le compte d’un député? – La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en rejetant la demande en révision judiciaire d’une décision de la Commission d’accès à l’information?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel

Maurice Boucher

c. (28280)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve - Témoin délateur - Mise en garde de type Vetrovec - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en renversant l’exercice du pouvoir discrétionnaire du juge du procès sans même référer aux faits de la cause, mais seulement à la plaidoirie de la Couronne - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en considérant comme potentiellement corroboratives des circonstances factuelles qui soit n’étaient pas indépendantes du témoignage de Gagné, soit n’avaient aucune relation avec la question en litige - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en appliquant à tort l’article 686(4) b)(i) du Code criminel , L.R.C. 1985, ch. C-46  - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit dans sa compréhension et dans son application de l’arrêt R. c. Vetrovec, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 811?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Fraternité des préposés à l'entretien des voies

c. (28124)

Canadien Pacifique Limitée (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Révision judiciaire - Preuve extrinsèque - Convention collective - Est-ce qu’un décideur unique dans un système d’arbitrage créé pour une industrie donnée peut rendre des décisions contradictoires sans que cela ne puisse justifier l’intervention des tribunaux supérieurs, et ce, en application de l’arrêt de cette Cour dans l’affaire Domtar c. Québec (CALP)? Est-ce qu’un arbitre peut recourir à une preuve extrinsèque afin de contredire des dispositions claires d’une convention collective sans que cela ne puisse justifier l’intervention des tribunaux supérieurs? Est-ce qu’une preuve extrinsèque qui ne traduit aucunement l’intention des parties à une convention peut servir à en contredire les dispositions?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Jones Power Co. Limited and J.A. Jones Construction Company

v. (28205)

Mitsui & Co. (Point Aconi) Ltd. (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Appeal - New trial - What is the correct legal test to be applied by an appellate court in the determination whether to order a new trial after finding error in the court below - Whether it is appropriate for an appellate court to make a determination of a material issue in an appeal on the basis of evidence not available to one of the parties, and in the absence of submissions on the effect of such evidence from one of the parties

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Johanne Blackburn

c. (28162)

Sylvain Boivin (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure  -  Appel  -  Responsabilité civile  -  Délit intentionnel  -  Requête en rejet d’appel dilatoire ou abusif  -  La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en accueillant la requête en rejet d’appel et en concluant que cet appel n’avait aucune chance de succès et était voué à l’échec ?  -  La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit sur le fardeau imposé à l’appelante lors d’une requête en rejet d’appel ?  -  Le juge de première instance a-t-il erré dans son appréciation des faits et de la crédibilité des témoins?  -  Code de procédure civile du Québec, L.R.Q., c. C-25, par. 501(5).

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

605715 Saskatchewan Ltd., carrying on business under the name “Showgirls” and  Sally Dube

v. (28152)

The Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Licensing Commission and The Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , ss. 1  and 2(b)  - Civil - Constitutional law - Administrative law - Freedom of expression - Liquor control licences - Striptease performance - Prohibited entertainment pursuant to s. 54(1)(b) of The Alcohol Control Regulations, 1994 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its Charter  analysis - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in making a distinction between expression for commercial purposes and other expressions - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in permitting Government an ability to place “time, manner and place” restrictions on expression without having to justify those restrictions under s. 1  of the Charter .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie

Allen Bulmer

v. (28375)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Judicial impartiality - Reasonable apprehension of bias - Whether there existed a reasonable apprehension of bias for the trial judge to preside over the Applicant’s trial in circumstances where the trial judge had previously presided over a trial in which the Applicant was convicted of similar charges and the trial judge had made adverse findings of credibility against the Applicant

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (28411)

Fotios Ploumis (Crim.)(Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Sentencing - Blended sentences where the totality of sentences exceeds two years less a day - Whether Court may combine a conditional sentence with a term of imprisonment.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Vimalathas Aseervatham

v. (28232)

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Civil - Civil rights - Right to counsel - Immigration law - Federal Court, Trial Division dismissing application for judicial review of Refugee Division’s decision to schedule hearing on a date on which it knew that Applicant’s counsel of choice was not available -  Whether Federal Court, Trial Division erred in ruling that Applicant’s right to counsel was not violated by Refugee Division’s decision - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , s. 7  - Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2, s. 69(1).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Vimalathas Aseervatham

v. (28218)

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Judicial review - Appeal - Jurisdiction - Immigration law - Federal Court, Trial Division dismissing application for judicial review of decision made under Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2 - Trial Division refusing to certify question pursuant to s. 83 of Act -  Whether Federal Court of Appeal erred in declining jurisdiction to entertain appeal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Rachel Leah Moss

v. (28228)

The Attorney General of Canada (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Bankruptcy - Power of court to annul bankruptcy - Motions judge granting Respondent’s application for an order annulling Applicant’s assignment in bankruptcy pursuant to s. 181(1)  of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3  - Whether, having found as a fact that Applicant was insolvent, court should exercise its discretion to annul assignment - Type of conduct or impact on creditors that should merit annulment of an assignment in bankruptcy - Whether status of annuity contracts a relevant consideration in disposition of motion to annul assignment.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MARCH 22, 2001 / LE 22 MARS 2001

28167                    FRANCIS RIOUX ‐ 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

Droit criminel - Législation - Interprétation - Preuve - Garde ou contrôle d’un véhicule - Présomption - La cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en statuant que la garde ou le contrôle a été prouvé par la simple existence d’une possibilité future de conduite, compte tenu que le demandeur a renversé la présomption prévue à l’article 258(1) a) du Code criminel  et qu’il a pris les moyens pour éviter de mettre son véhicule en marche en prenant soin

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 7 mai 1998

Cour du Québec

(Bilodeau j.c.q.)

Déclaration de culpabilité: garde ou le contrôle d’un véhicule à moteur alors que  capacité de conduire du Demandeur était affaiblie par l’alcool contrairement aux articles 253  a) et 255(1)  du Code criminel 

28159                    STANLEY DWYER ‐ v. ‐ CAVALLUZZO, HAYES, SHILTON, McINTYRE & CORNISH AND JAMES K. A. HAYES (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

Labour law - Barristers and solicitors - Duty of fair representation - Applicant bringing action against law firm and lawyer claiming that they breached their duty to act competently and skilfully in representing him in a grievance arbitration - Motions judge concluding that court had no jurisdiction to entertain claim - Whether Court of Appeal erred in affirming decision - Whether unfair representation provision in Canada Labour Code  operates so as to deprive court of jurisdiction to consider claim - Canada Labour Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. L-2, s. 37 .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27987                    SYNDICAT NATIONAL DES EMPLOYÉS MUNICIPAUX DE POINTE‐CLAIRE ‐ c. ‐ MARC BOISVERT, EN SA QUALITÉ D'ARBITRE DE GRIEFS - et - VILLE DE POINTE-CLAIRE  (Qué.) (Civile)

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

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de la mise en cause Ville de Pointe-Claire.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the mise en cause City of Pointe-Claire.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail – Congédiement – Employé congédié pour cause de maladie – Le congédiement est-il une pratique discriminatoire au sens de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., c. C-22, art. 10, 16 et 20? – La Cour supérieure et la Cour d’appel ont-elles erré quant à l’intensité des obligations d’accommodement d’un employeur en matière de handicap? – La Cour supérieure et la Cour d’appel ont-elle erré quant à l’existence d’accommodements contractuels non respectés par l’employeur, la Ville de Pointe-Claire?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

28125                    ANRAJ FISH PRODUCTS INDUSTRIES LTD. AND BENGAL SEAFOODS INC. ‐ v. ‐ HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE CO. LTD. (FC) (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

International law - Conflicts of law - Choice of jurisdiction - Forum selection clause in bill of lading - Commercial law - Contracts - Maritime contract - Consideration of the factors set out in The Eleftheria [1969] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 237 case - Appellate review - Standard of review - The interpretation of jurisdiction clauses in bills of lading - What is the appropriate standard of second-level appellate review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

November 1, 1999

Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division

(Lafrenière, Prothonotary)                 

Action stayed pending litigation of this matter in Seoul Civil District Court with fixed costs

28245                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ‐ v. ‐ CATHERINE HUFF (Crim.) (Ont.)

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

Criminal Law - Driving over 80 - Evidence to the contrary - Compellability of statement - Statement given to police while detained and before afforded right to counsel - Whether roadside statements of an accused as to alcohol consumption can be considered by a trial judge in relation to a defence of evidence to the contrary - Whether decision is in conflict with R. v. Smug, [1998] O.J. No. 4357 (QL)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28306                    LARRY DRURY, WILLIAM HAZARD ‐ v. ‐ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Man.) (Criminal)

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

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Right to counsel - Appointment of state-funded counsel - Whether the motions judge erred in not ordering the Crown to pay for counsel to represent the Applicants at trial - Trial procedure - Voir dire - Whether the trial judge erred in reading in evidence adduced on the voir dire

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28251                    JOSEPH SHAUN FINNESSEY ‐ v. ‐ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

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

Criminal law - Sentencing appeal - Sentence varied by court of appeal - Appellate review of sentencing - Whether the court of appeal erred in substituting their view of an appropriate sentence for that of the trial judge in the absence of an error in principle or an unfit sentence - Whether the court of appeal erred in fettering a trial judge’s discretion on sentence by requiring a penitentiary sentence for convictions for criminal harassment.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

27895                    ROLSTON RICARDO MOFFATT ‐ v. ‐ THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION (FC) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

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

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Civil - Sections 7  and 15  of the Charter - Immigration law - Deportation - Danger to the public determination by the Minister - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the motion to adduce fresh evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the constitutional question challenging the constitutionality of subsection 70(5) of the Immigration Act pursuant to s. 15  of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in dismissing the appeal, and in ordering the Applicant to pay costs.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28150                    DOUGLAS SLOAN ‐ v. ‐ THE YORK REGION DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD, GARY MICHAEL, PERSONALLY AND AS VICE‐PRINCIPAL OF THE YORK REGION DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD, MICHAEL MAGARREY, PERSONALLY AND AS A PRINCIPAL OF THE YORK REGION DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD, HELEN FOX, PERSONALLY AND AS PRINCIPAL OF THE YORK REGION DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD, UNKNOWN OTHERS, PERSONALLY AND AS AGENTS OR OFFICERS OF THE YORK REGION DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (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

Procedural law - Actions - Torts - Libel and slander - Did lower courts err in disposition of case.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28142                    HENRY McALISTER LANG ‐ v. ‐ YOLANDA NACCARATO (Ont.) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs fixed at $5,000 on a solicitor and client basis.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens fixés au montant de 5 000 $ sur une base d’avocat-client.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Costs - Appeal - Assessment order reducing lawyer’s bill of costs to client - Whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to reverse the order

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

June 25, 1998

Ontario Court (General Division)

Lane, A.O.

Assessment report requiring Applicant to return the sum of $12,582.68 to the Respondent client

December 9, 1998

Superior Court of Justice

(Noble J.)

Motion to adduce further evidence and motion opposing confirmation of report of Assessment Officer dismissed with costs

March 28, 2000

Divisional Court, Superior Court of Justice

(O'Driscoll, Millette and Marshman JJ.)

Appeal dismissed with costs

June 28, 2000

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(McMurtry C.J.O., Morden and Rosenberg JJ.A.)

Applicant’s motion for leave to appeal dismissed  with costs

September 25, 2000

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

28235                    EKREM PUPOVIC ‐ v. ‐ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

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

Criminal law - Trial - Evidence - Sentencing - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in failing to hold that the verdict of guilty on the charge of unlawful confinement was inconsistent with the Applicant’s acquittal on all the other charges - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in applying too narrow a test in determining whether a verdict is inconsistent - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in holding that the learned trial judge did not err in law in holding that an attack on the complainant’s credibility opened up the Applicant to cross-examination upon his criminal history involving crimes of violence - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in holding that the learned trial judge did not err in law in admitting in reply, evidence that was excluded as hearsay and not admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule or pursuant to the principled rule for admission - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in holding that the learned trial judge did not err in law in admitting improper reply evidence which tended to show that the Applicant was a person of bad character thus substantially prejudicing the Applicant’s right to a fair trial

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

January 27, 1998

Ontario Court of Justice

(Whealy J.)

Applicant convicted by jury of the charge of unlawful confinement contrary to s. 279(2)  of the Criminal Code , and acquitted of charges of  breaking and entering a dwelling place with intent to commit an indictable offence and attempted kidnapping contrary to ss. 349(1)  and 279(1)  of the Criminal Code             

28083                    GEORGE BABES, PAUL SLAT, CHRISTOPHER BARTLETT, DOMINGUS MOURA, LUIGI FILIPELLI AND ALLISTER MCCREADY ‐ v. ‐ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (Criminal)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ.

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

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Evidence - Informer privilege - Whether the informant who provided evidence enabling police to obtain a wiretap authorization was really an agent of the police - Whether the Crown committed an abuse of process by changing its position with respect to the informant - Whether the appropriate remedy for such an abuse of process is the disclosure of the informant’s identity

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28211                    ABTAR SINGH BAINS ‐ v. ‐ RAGBIER SINGH BHANDAR (B.C.) (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

Procedural law - Civil Procedure - Appeal - Evidence - New evidence -Due diligence in discovering concealed evidence - Whether an undisclosed agreement which might inhibit a material witness from giving evidence constitutes an interference with the administration of justice which warrants the judgment being set aside and a new trial ordered - What are the tests which a court of appeal must apply where it reconsiders its own decision after judgment has been handed down but before the order has been entered - Whether a party who conceals evidence can rely on the defence of due diligence in arguing that his adversary should have discovered the concealed evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28174                    IMPERIAL TOBACCO LIMITED, ROTHMANS, BENSON & HEDGES INC. ‐ v. ‐ LJUBISA SPASIC, AS ESTATE TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE OF MIRJANA SPASIC (Ont.) (Civil)

CORAM:               Gonthier, Major and Binnie 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 - Motion to strike pleadings - Torts - Spoliation - Action against tobacco manufacturers for general, aggravated, exemplary and punitive damages for lung cancer caused to Respondent - Whether spoliation of evidence constitutes a cause of action - Whether it is plain and obvious that there is no cause of action in Canada for the intentional spoliation of evidence - Whether there is a conflict between British Columbia and Ontario appellate courts

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

13.3.2001

Before / Devant:  BASTARACHE J.

Motion for additional time to present oral argument

The Law Society of British Columbia

v. (27108)

Jaswant Singh Mangat, et al. (B.C.)

Requête en prorogation du temps accordé pour la plaidoirie

DISMISSED / REJETÉE    Motion on behalf of the respondents Mangat and Sparling, jointly, for an order extending the length of their oral arguments to a total of one hour and fifteen minutes is dismissed.

13.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

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

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27838)

Z.L. (Crim.)(B.C.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time to serve and file the respondent’s factum extended to January 19, 2001, nunc pro tunc.  Time to serve and file the respondent’s book of authorities extended to March 2, 2001, nunc pro tunc.

13.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent's response

Fred Weeks

v. (28421)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la réponse de l'intimée

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to April 6, 2001.

13.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent’s factum and book of authorities and motion for permission to file the respondent’s factum without marginal numbering

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (28226)

Lloyd Alfred Pakoo (Crim.)(Man.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intimé et requête visant à obtenir l’autorisation de déposer le mémoire de l’intimé sans numérotation dans la marge

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to March 1, 2001.

13.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the applicant's reply

Golden Flight Travel Ltd.

v. (28341)

Jowaks Developments Limited, et al. (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la réplique du requérante

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to March 9, 2001.

14.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum and book of authorities of the interveners Friends of the Earth, West Coast Environmental Law Association and Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment

John Hollick

v. (27699)

The City of Toronto (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine des intervenants Les Ami(e)s de la terre, West Coast Environmental Law Association et Association canadienne des médecins pour l’environnement

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to March 30, 2001.

14.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent's response

La Procureure générale du Québec

c. (28431)

Le Syndicat du personnel de l’enseignement du Nord de la Capitale (Qué.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la réponse de l'intimé

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 17 avril 2001.

14.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Miscellaneous motion

Ralph Dick, et al.

v. (27641)

Her Majesty the Queen, et al. (F.C.)

Autre requête

GRANTED IN PART / ACCORDÉE EN PARTIE    The parties are permitted to serve and file 12 copies of a joint record on or before May 8, 2001.  The time to serve and file the appellants’ factums and books of authorities is extended to May 8, 2001.  The time to serve and file the respondents’ factums and book of authorities is extended to August 7, 2001.

15.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend time and motion for an order permitting the respondent to file a supplementary record

Sa Majesté la Reine

c. (27581)

Neil Peters (Crim.)(Qué.)

Requête en prorogation du délai et requête visant à obtenir une ordonnance autorisant l’intimé de déposer un dossier supplémentaire

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    La requête pour obtenir une ordonnance prorogeant le délai pour signifier et produire le mémoire et le dossier de l’appelante en réponse à l’appel incident au 19 février 2001 est accordée et la requête pour obtenir une ordonnance permettant à l’intimé de déposer un dossier supplémentaire est accordée.

15.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

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

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick as represented by The Minister of Finance, et al.

v. (27722)

Ian P. Mackin, et al. (N.B.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intervenante la Procureure générale du Québec

GRANTED / ACORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 15 avril 2001.

15.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file a joint response of the landowner respondents

The Chippewas of Sarnia Band

v. (28365)

Attorney General of Canada, et al. (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt d’une réponse conjointe des propriétaires fonciers intimés

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to May 30, 2001.

15.3.2001

Valérie Tremblay

c. (27965)

Le Syndicat des employées et employés professionnels-les et de bureau, section locale 57 SIEPB, CFC-FTQ (Qué.)

15.3.2001

Compagnie d’assurance-vie Transamerica Canada

c. (27939)

Danielle Goulet (Qué.)

16.3.2001

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

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27838)

Z.L. (B.C.)(Crim.)(As of Right)

John M. Gordon and Beverly MacLean for the appellant.

William B. Smart, Q.C. for the respondent.

DISMISSED / REJETÉ

Iacobucci J. (orally):

Mr. Smart, it will not be necessary to hear from you, the Court is ready to pronounce judgment.

This is an appeal as of right.  Looking at all the circumstances of this case, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment of the majority of the British Columbia Court of Appeal and accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

[traduction]  Le juge Iacobucci (oralement):

Il ne sera pas nécessaire de vous entendre M^e Smart, la Cour est prête à rendre jugement.

Le présent pourvoi est formé de plein droit.  Compte tenu de toutes les circonstances de l’affaire, nous ne voyons aucune raison de modifier l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de la Colombie‐Britannique et, par conséquent, nous rejetons le pourvoi.

Nature of the case:

Criminal law - Evidence - Sexual assault -Trial - Verdict - Whether the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in law in concluding that the verdict reached by the trial judge was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Preuve - Agressions sexuelles- Procès - Verdict - La Cour d’appel à la majorité a-t-elle commis une erreur de droit en concluant que le verdict du juge du procès était déraisonnable ou ne pouvait s’appuyer sur la preuve?

16.3.2001

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

W.B.C.

v. (27822)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)(Crim.)(As of Right)

Sharon E. Lavine for the appellant.

Randy Schwartz for the respondent.

DISMISSED / REJETÉ

Iacobucci J. (orally):

Ms. Lavine, you have said all that could be said on behalf of your client.  Mr. Schwartz, it will not be necessary to hear from you, the Court is ready to pronounce judgment.

This appeal comes to us as of right. The sole issue in the appeal is whether the proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code  can be invoked to uphold the appellant’s conviction.  For substantially the reasons of the majority in the Ontario Court of Appeal, we agree that the proviso properly applies and accordingly we dismiss the appeal.

[Traduction]  Le Juge Iacobucci (oralement):

Maître Lavine, vous avez dit tout ce qui pouvait être dit en faveur de votre client.  Maître Schwartz, il ne sera pas nécessaire de vous entendre, la Cour est prête à rendre jugement.

Le présent appel nous a été soumis de plein droit. La seule question en litige dans le présent pourvoi est de savoir si le sous-al. 686(1)b)(iii) du Code criminel  peut être invoqué pour confirmer la déclaration de culpabilité de l’appelant.  Essentiellement pour les motifs exposés par les juges de la majorité en Cour d’appel de l’Ontario, nous sommes d’avis que cette disposition s’applique et, en conséquence, nous rejetons l’appel.

Nature of the case:

Criminal law - Evidence - Error of trial judge in admission of out-of-court statement by earlier complainant and exclusion of the transcript of the earlier trial with respect to the circumstances surrounding the commission of the sexual assault to establish the evidence of similar facts or prior discreditable conduct - Whether the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in law in applying the curative proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) to uphold the Appellant’s conviction for sexual assault?

Nature de la cause:

Droit criminel - Preuve - Le juge du procès a commis une erreur en concluant à l’admissibilité d’une déclaration extrajudiciaire faite par une ancienne plaignante et à l’exclusion de la transcription d’un procès antérieur, relativement aux circonstances entourant la perpétration de l’infraction d’agression sexuelle, en vue d’établir une preuve de faits similaires ou de conduite déshonorante antérieure - Les juges majoritaires de la Cour d’appel ont-ils commis une erreur de droit en appliquant la disposition réparatrice du sous-alinéa 686(1)b)(iii) afin de maintenir la déclaration de culpabilité de l’appelant pour agression sexuelle?

19.3.2001

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

Ludco Enterprises Ltd., et al

v. (27320)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.)(Civil)(By Leave)

Guy Du Pont, François Barette and Robert Raizenne for the appellants.

Pierre Cossette and Sophie-Lyne Lefebvre for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Taxation - Income tax - Income from a business or property - Deductions - Expenses incurred in borrowing money - Interest - Capital gains - Taxpayers borrowing to invest in shares of two foreign companies - Taxpayers paying $6M in interest - Taxpayers realizing a capital gain of $9.2M upon redemption of shares - Whether taxpayers entitled to deduct interest on the funds borrowed to finance their investment pursuant to paragraph 20(1)(c)(i) of the Income Tax Act,  S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63 (ITA).

Nature de la cause:

Droit fiscal - Impôt sur le revenu - Revenu tiré d'une entreprise ou d'un bien - Déductions - Frais engagés pour  emprunter des fonds - Intérêt - Gains en capital - Les contribuables ont emprunté des fonds pour investir dans l'acquisition d'actions de deux sociétés étrangères - Les frais d'intérêt se sont élevés à 6 000 000 $ - Lors du rachat des actions, les contribuables ont réalisé un gain en capital de 9 200 000 $ - Les contribuables peuvent‐ils déduire les frais d'intérêt engagés pour financer leur investissement suivant le sous-alinéa 20(1)c)(i) de la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu, L.C. 1970-71-72, ch. 63 (LIR).

19.3.2001

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

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (27477)

John R. Singleton (F.C.)(Civil)(By Leave)

Donald G. Gibson and Deen C. Olsen for the appellant.

John H. Saunders for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Taxation - Income tax ‐ Income from business or property ‐ Deductions ‐ Interest payments - Direct use of the borrowed funds - Whether all transactions that are “conterminous and interdependent” must be taken into account in determining whether borrowed money was “used for the purpose of earning income” from a business or property within the meaning of paragraph 20(1)(c) of the Act.

Nature de la cause:

Droit fiscal - Impôt sur le revenu ‐ Revenu d’une entreprise ou d’un bien ‐ Déductions ‐ Intérêts payés - Utilisation directe de la somme empruntée - Toutes les opérations qui sont «survenu[e]s l'une à la suite de  l'autre» et qui sont «interdépendant[e]s» doivent-elles être prises en considération pour déterminer si l’argent emprunté a été «utilisé en vue de tirer un revenu» d'une entreprise ou d'un bien au sens de l’al. 20(1)c) de la Loi?

20.3.2001

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

Thierry Van Doosselaere, et al.

v. (27905)

Holt Cargo Systems Inc., et al. (Qué)(Civil)(By Leave)

and between

Frans G.A. Deroy, et al.

v. (27290)

Holt Cargo Systems Inc. (F.C.)(Civil)(By Leave)

Mark E. Meland for the appellants Van Doosselaere, et al. (27905).

David G. Colford for the appellants Deroy, et al. (27290).

Richard L. Desgagnés and Véronique Marquis pour les intimées Holt Cargo, et al. (27905).

Thomas E. Hart and Jane O’Neill for the respondent Holt Cargo (27290).

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case (27905):

International Law - Commercial Law - Conflict of Laws - Bankruptcy - Whether the issues in this case arise primarily from a bankruptcy matter or a maritime matter - Whether Canada favours a “universal” or territorial” approach to international insolvencies and bankruptcies - Which Court in Canada had jurisdiction to receive and rule on the Request for Assistance from the Belgian Bankruptcy Court?

Nature de la cause (27905):

Droit international - droit commercial - conflit de lois - faillite - les questions en litige dans la présente affaire sont-elles d’abord liées aux lois de la faillite ou aux lois maritimes? - le Canada est-il favorable à une approche « universelle » ou « territoriale » en ce qui concerne les cas internationaux d’insolvabilité et de faillite? - quel tribunal canadien a la compétence pour accueillir une demande d’aide du tribunal de la faillite de Belgique et prononcer un jugement à ce sujet?

Nature of the case (27290):

International Law - Maritime Law - Commercial Law - Bankruptcy - Conflict of Laws - Securities - Maritime lien - Whether in international bankruptcies, the universal approach should be adopted unless there are  public policy reasons to the contrary, which means that the admiralty territorial approach must give way - Whether by virtue of their differing subject matter over which each court exercises jurisdiction, the admiralty court must defer to or, at least, be seen to be cooperative with, the directions of the bankruptcy court - Whether the response of Canadian courts must be uniform.

Nature de la cause (27290):

Droit international - Droit maritime - Droit commercial - Faillite - Conflit de lois - Sûretés - Privilège maritime - Dans les faillites internationales, la démarche universelle devrait‐elle être adoptée à moins qu’il n’existe des motifs d’ordre public exigeant le contraire, ce qui signifierait que la démarche territoriale en matière d’amirauté doive céder le pas? - Compte tenu des différentes matières sur lesquelles les tribunaux exercent leur compétence, le tribunal de l’amirauté doit-il faire preuve de retenue envers les directives du tribunal de la faillite ou, à tout le moins, paraître faire preuve de collaboration à son égard? - La réponse des tribunaux canadiens doit-elle être uniforme?

21.3.2001

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

The Law Society of British Columbia

v. (27108)

Jaswant Singh Mangat, et al. (B.C.)(Civil)(By Leave)

William S. Berardino, Q.C. and Elizabeth B. Lyall for the appellant.

Neena Sharma for the intervener Attorney General of British Columbia.

Michel Y. Hélie for the intervener Attorney General for Ontario.

Rodney G. Garson for the intervener Attorney General of Manitoba.

Mira J. Thow for the intervener Canadian Bar Association.

Jack Giles, Q.C. and Susan B. Horne for the respondent Jill Sparling.

Richard R. Sugden, Q.C. and Craig P. Dennis for the respondent J.S. Mangat.

Urszula Kaczmarczyk, Kevin Lunney and Brenda Carbonell for the intervener Attorney General of Canada.

Malcolm N. Roby for the intervener Association of Immigration Counsel of Canada.

Jack Giles, Q.C. and Susan B. Horne for the intervener Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants Inc.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

Nature of the case:

Constitutional law - Paramountcy of federal statutes - Barristers and Solicitors - Unauthorized practice of law - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether s 26 of the Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1987 c.25 is constitutionally inoperative or inapplicable to persons acting under ss. 30 and 69 of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2 and its associated Rules and Regulations and, if so, are the latter provisions ultra vires Parliament - Whether there is a operational conflict between the two statutory provisions.

Nature de la cause:

Droit constitutionnel - Primauté des lois fédérales - Avocats et procureurs - Pratique illégale du droit - Lois - Interprétation - L’article 26 de la Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1987 ch. 25, est-il inopérant du point de vue constitutionnel ou inapplicable aux personnes agissant en vertu des art. 30 et 69 de la Loi sur l’immigration, L.R.C. (1985), ch. I-2, et ses textes d’application? - Dans l’affirmative, ces dispositions excèdent-elles la compétence du Parlement? - Y a-t-il un conflit d’application entre les deux dispositions législatives?

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

2000