Bulletins

      OF CANADA                                             DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

January 21, 2005  72 - 107                                                                  le 21 janvier 2005

CONTENTS                                                     TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Jean-Pierre Jolicoeur

Carole Tremblay

Dufour, Mottet

c. (30678)

Monique Dussault (Qc)

Guylaine Ladouceur

DATE DE PRODUCTION:   17.12.2004

Tracy-Ann Spencer

Julian N. Falconer

Falconer, Charney, Macklin

v. (30473)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

J.W. Leising

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE: 10.01.2005

JANUARY 17, 2005 / LE 17 JANVIER 2005

                                                CORAM:  Chief Justice McLachlin and Binnie and Charron JJ.

La juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Binnie et Charron

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30456)

Yagianath Maharaj (Crim.) (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedure - Judgments and reasons for judgment - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in concluding that the trial judge’s reasons for judgment violated the duty to give reasons.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30480)

S.J.D.  (Crim.) (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedure- Judgments and reasons for judgment - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in concluding that the trial judge’s reasons for judgment violated the duty to give reasons.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30641)

Bile Warsame Dore (Crim.) (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedure - Judgments and reasons for judgment - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in concluding that the trial judge’s reasons for judgment violated the duty to give reasons.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Michael Abraham, Paragon Commercial Enterprises Inc. and Mega‐Lab Manufacturing Company, Ltd.

v. (30526)

United Laboratories, Inc.  (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether an agreement to arbitrate any dispute that relates to, or arises out of, a contract between a foreign party and a Canadian party ousts the jurisdiction of the courts with respect to all disputes between the parties - Whether the Court of Appeal was too narrow in the scope of claims and disputes which will be covered by choice of law/arbitration clauses.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:  Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

Les juges Major, Fish et Abella

Stanislaw Bigos

v. (30428)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law (Non Charter) - Evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the fresh evidence was not admissible

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Louis Ludwik Furtak

v. (30603)

Timothy J. Valgardson (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  (Civil ) - Procedural Law - Appeal - Judgments and orders - Whether there was a denial of due process and natural justice - Whether there was a breach of s. 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Whether the decision from the Law Society of Manitoba can be appealed? - Whether the Law Society of Manitoba erred in its determination that the services provided by the Respondent were appropriate in the circumstances?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

410727 B.C. Ltd., Walline Ltd., Minoru Investments Ltd. and Y.H. Canadian Property Investment Trust

v. (30543)

Dayhu Investments Ltd. and City of Richmond (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Limitation of actions - Prescription - Cause of action - Cause of action against Respondents accrued to Applicants in 1968 - Respondents’ negligence was not discovered until fire arising from another party’s discrete negligence in 2002 - Respondents’ negligence in 1968 contributed to damage suffered in 2002 fire - Whether a new cause of action arose against Respondents - Whether only one cause of action can arise if a different and subsequent set of facts gives rise to a new and different type of damages - Whether the Applicants’ cause of action for physical damage to their building and related loss of income and chattels, caused by an extrinsic act, accrued when the building was completed or when the physical damage occurred, in circumstances where building code deficiencies merely contributed to the extent of the damage.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Nanaimo Immigrant Settlement Society and the Juan de Fuca Marine Rescue Society

(formerly known as the Sooke Marine Rescue Society)

v. (30542)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional law – Division of powers – Taxation – Criminal law – Gaming and betting – Regulation and licensing – Province of British Columbia levying fees against charitable organizations on sale of bingo cards and charging casino licence fees pursuant to Lottery Act – Class action commenced by charitable and religious organizations for repayment of fees – Class action alleging unjust enrichment – Class action challenging constitutionality of fees as constituting indirect taxation and therefore ultra vires Province –  Whether fees constituting regulatory fees or taxation – If fees on sale of bingo cards taxes, whether constituting direct or indirect taxation – Whether bingo and casino fees contrary to gaming provisions of Criminal Code , in particular, s. 207(1)(b), because fees not used by Province for charitable purposes – Whether restitution lies for taxes paid under an ultra vires tax – Constitution Act, 1867 , s. 92(9)  – Criminal Code, R.S.C. c. C-46, s. 207(1)(b), Lottery Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 249 (repealed S.B.C. 2002, c. 14, s. 112). 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:  Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

Ernest William Westergard

v. (30623)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law (Non Charter)- Offences - First degree murder - Sexual assault - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in dismissing the Applicant’s appeal from conviction - Whether a dead body can be “sexually assaulted” for the purposes of s. 231(5)(b) - Whether MacPherson J.A. erroneously reversed the burden of proof by putting an onus on an accused to raise an air of reality to the proposition that the underlying offence was committed after and/or in a separate transaction as the murder for the purposes of constructive first degree murder under s. 231(5) - Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 231(5) (b)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Léo Durand

c. (30628)

Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec et Procureur général du Québec (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Exception déclinatoire - Est-ce qu’une requête visant à contester la constitutionnalité des art. 76 et 76.1 du Code de la sécurité routière, L.R.Q., ch. C-24.2, relève de la compétence du Tribunal administratif du Québec ou de la Cour supérieure? - Quelle est l’étendue de la discrétion que possède un juge pour façonner une ordonnance de sauvegarde, en l’occurrence la délivrance d’un permis de conduire pendant l’instance, qui corresponde aux besoins des parties et quels critères doivent être considérés?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Corporation Sun Media

c. (30532)

Société de transport de Montréal, Publications Métropolitaines Inc.  (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte canadienne  (civil) – Libertés publiques – Libertés de presse et d’expression – Contrat d’exclusivité conclu par la Société de transport de Montréal quant à la distribution d’un quotidien gratuit dans des stations de métro – La conclusion du contrat est-elle contraire aux art. 2 b )  de la Charte canadienne  et 3 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., ch. C-12?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Serge Côté

c. (30515)

Commission administrative des régimes de retraite et d’assurances

et le Procureur général du Québec

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Compétence - Contrôle judiciaire - Législation - Interprétation - Dommages-intérêts - Compétence implicite d’un arbitre - Erreur commise par une commission administrative (CARRA) - Prise de retraite sur la foi de cette erreur - Loi sur le régime de retraite des employés du gouvernement et des organismes publics, L.R.Q. ch.R-10, art. 179 à 186 - Loi sur le régime de retraite des enseignants, L.R.Q. ch.R-11 - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en infirmant le jugement de la Cour supérieure et, par le fait même, en refusant d’admettre que le Tribunal d’arbitrage institué par cette loi a juridiction pour adjuger une réclamation en dommages-intérêts?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

JANUARY 20, 2005 / LE 20 JANVIER 2005

30464                    Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada v. Connie Fidler (B.C.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Binnie and Charron JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA030244, dated May 17, 2004, is granted without costs.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA030244, daté du 17 mai 2004, est accordée sans dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Damages - Accident and sickness policy - Aggravated and punitive damages - Is an independent actionable wrong a prerequisite for an award of aggravated damages for breach of an insurance contract? - What is the legal test for determining whether a plaintiff can recover aggravated damages in contract for “mental distress”? - What is the proper approach for determining whether an insurer’s conduct constitutes bad faith as opposed to reasonable investigation of the insured’s claim?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30548                     Gary Leskun v. Sherry Jean Leskun (B.C.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Binnie and Charron JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA031247, 2004 BCCA 422, dated August 3, 2004, is granted with costs to follow the event.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA031247, 2004 BCCA 422,  daté du 3 août 2004, est accordée.  Les dépens suivront l’issue de l’affaire.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family Law - Spousal support - Spousal misconduct - Whether s. 15.2(5) or s. 17 of the Divorce Act  permit a court to consider spousal misconduct in determining whether a spouse has failed to achieve to achieve economic self-sufficiency - Whether it is appropriate for the court to consider the parties’ capital positions in relation to the ability to pay support in cases involving a determination of support pursuant to ss. 15.1  or 15.2  of the Divorce Act  - Whether s. 15.2 of the Divorce Act  permits a review order for spousal support - What is the test for making a review order for support as compared to a time-limited order for spousal support - Whether there is a subjective and/or objective test for determining if a spouse has the ability to pay support or for determining if a spouse has met the duty or obligation to pursue the goal of self-sufficiency set out in s. 15.2(6)  of the Divorce Act  - Whether the Court of Appeal for British Columbia erred as a matter of law in the application of that test in the present case - Divorce Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp .), s. 15.2(5).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30436                    Via Rail Canada Inc. v. George Cairns, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, Canadian National Railway Company, United Transportation Union AND BETWEEN Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. George Cairns, Via Rail Canada Inc., United Transportation Union, Canadian National Railway Company (FC) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Binnie and Charron JJ.

 The applications for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐273‐03, dated May 17, 2004, are dismissed with costs to the respondents George Cairns and United Transportation Union in both leave applications.

 Les demandes d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel fédérale, numéro A‐273‐03, daté du 17 mai 2004, sont rejetées avec dépens en faveur des intimés George Cairns et Travailleurs unis des transports dans les deux demandes d’autorisation.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Labour law - Judicial review - Labour relations - Collective agreement - Remedies - What is the authority and jurisdiction of a labour relations board to dictate the terms of a collective agreement over the objections of both the employer and the certified bargaining agent, and to substitute a board-ordered collective agreement for the agreement reached between the bargaining parties and to impose onerous and intrusive remedies against an employer that has not breached any obligation owed under labour relations legislation, and where the remedy is imposed solely in respect of the bargaining agent’s breach of the duty of fair representation of its members?  - Paramountcy of the right to free, bi-lateral collective bargaining within Canada’s Labour relations regime, and the authority and jurisdiction of a labour relations board to order a tri-partite bargaining process - What is the applicable standard of review and whether  provincial appellate courts and the Federal Court of Appeal can apply a standard of review different than that held by the Supreme Court of Canada.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

October 22, 1999

Canadian Industrial Relations Board

(Pineau, Vice-Chairperson)

Applicant’s application under section 18 of the Canada Labour Code for the collective bargaining certificate to be amended by consolidating the two bargaining units of the running trades, granted

May 15, 2003

Canadian Industrial Relations Board

(Pineau, Vice-Chairperson)

Application for judicial review dismissed; Alternate form of compensation imposed by Board

30415                    Vernon Roy Mazzei v. Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Services, Attorney General of British Columbia (B.C.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Binnie and Charron JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA029739, dated April 29, 2004, is granted without costs

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA029739, daté du 29 avril 2004, est accordée sans dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law (Non Charter) - Sentencing - Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Whether British Columbia Review Board has jurisdiction to impose conditions  of a disposition order  on the Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Service - Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 , Part XX.1, s. 672.54.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30467                    Association des juristes d’expression française du Nouveau‐Brunswick c. Ville de Saint‐Jean - ET ENTRE - Mario Charlebois c. Ville de Saint‐Jean (N.‐B.) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    La juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Binnie et Charron

La requête de l’Association demanderesse  visant à être ajoutée comme partie est accordée.  Les demandes d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel du Nouveau‐Brunswick, numéro 166/02/CA, daté du 17 juin 2004, sont accordées sans dépens.

The applicant Association’s motion to be added as a party is granted.  The applications for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick, Number 166/02/CA, dated June 17, 2004, are granted without costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Législation – Interprétation – Emploi, par un défendeur, de la langue officielle choisie par la partie demanderesse dans une instance civile engagée contre Sa Majesté du chef du Nouveau-Brunswick ou une institution – Loi sur les langues officielles, Loi sur les langues officielles, L.N.-B. 2002, ch. O-0.5, art. 22 et 1 – La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en jugeant que les municipalités et les cités du Nouveau-Brunswick n’étaient pas des « institutions » au sens de l’art. 1 de la Loi sur les langues officielles et n’étaient donc pas tenues d’utiliser la langue officielle choisie par le demandeur dans l’instance civile intentée contre la Ville intimée?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30459                    Her Majesty the Queen v. James Coultice, Scott Tarpey (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C37337, dated May 13, 2004, is dismissed.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario, numéro C37337, daté du 13 mai 2004, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Trial - Whether lower courts erred in law by excluding certain proposed Crown evidence- Whether Court of Appeal should have directed a new trial.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30500                    C.B.M. v. Her Majesty the Queen (Alta.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Edmonton), Number 0303‐0088‐A3, dated February 25, 2004, is dismissed.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Alberta (Edmonton), numéro 0303‐0088‐A3, daté du 25 février 2004, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law (Non Charter) - Procedural law - Evidence - Jury Charge - Bolstering credibility of a witness  - Testimony of a complainant under 14 years of age given under oath - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial judge acted judicially in exercising his discretion to swear the child complainant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial judge’s repeated emphasis to the jury of the importance of his decision to swear the complainant did not render the trial unfair - Canada Evidence Act , R.S.C.1985, c. C-5, s. 16 .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30493                    S.G.H. v. Board of Trustees of Calgary School District 19, also known as The Calgary School Board (Alta.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Calgary), Number 01‐00147, 2004 ABCA 186, dated June 2, 2004, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Alberta (Calgary), numéro 01‐00147, 2004 ABCA 186, daté du 2 juin 2004, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Intentional torts - Sexual abuse - Vicarious liability - Non-residential schools - Whether a non-residential school board can be held vicariously liable for the intentional tort (specifically, child sexual abuse) of its employee, the child’s teacher - Whether the above issue is of national and public importance in that the problem of child sexual abuse, and, specifically, child sexual abuse by teachers, is unfortunately prevalent throughout Canada, and jurisprudence with respect to vicarious liability in this particular context will affect the millions of children, thousands of teachers, and hundreds of school boards involved in non-residential school systems across the country

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30535                    Bayer AG, Bayer Inc. v. Apotex Inc., Minister of Health (FC) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐546‐03, dated June 23, 2004, is dismissed with costs to the respondent Apotex Inc.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel fédérale, numéro A‐546‐03, daté du 23 juin 2004, est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de l’intimée Apotex Inc.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Patents - Whether order is in direct conflict with previous decisions of the Federal Court of Appeal- Whether Court of Appeal’s contradictory decisions provide a right to appeal to a distinct class of person (i.e. generic drug manufacturers) while denying this right to a different class of person (i.e. owners of patents for medicines) based on identical fact situations.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30486                    Brookfield Lepage Johnson Controls Facility Management Services v. Minister of Public Works and Government Services (FC) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐164‐03, dated May 31, 2004, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel fédérale, numéro A‐164‐03, daté du 31 mai 2004, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Administrative law - Interpretation - Judicial review - How should s. 20(1)  of the Access to Information Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 , operate where a third party is invited to submit confidential information to a government institution with assurances from said institution that confidentiality will be maintained over the documents and where the third party, relying on such assurances, submits confidential information? - What is the the deference that should be accorded to the findings of fact by the judge of first instance and the inherent danger and potential harm to the judicial system and the administration of justice where an appeal court, in effect,”rewrites” the judge’s findings of fact;

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30534                    Maribel Anaya Castillo v. Antonio Munoz Castillo (Alta.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Calgary), Number 02‐0207‐AC, dated July 9, 2004, is granted with costs to the applicant in any event of the cause.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Alberta (Calgary), numéro 02‐0207‐AC, daté du 9 juillet 2004, est accordée avec dépens en faveur de la demanderesse quelle que soit l’issue de l’appel.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes – Interpretation – Procedural law – Limitation of actions – Torts – Motor vehicles – Motor vehicle accident occurring in California where limitation period is one year – Parties both Alberta residents – Action commenced in Alberta after two years less one day – Alberta limitation period is two years – Alberta Limitations Act s. 12 providing Alberta limitation period applies “notwithstanding” claim will be adjudicated under “substantive law of another jurisdiction” – Courts below finding defence of expired California limitation period available to defendant because tort no longer actionable under law of place where tort occurred, per Tolofson v. Jensen, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022 – Courts below further finding common law in Tolofson not changed by s. 12 and that both Tolofson and s. 12 apply – Whether Alberta Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s. 12 Limitations Act by failing to give effect to plain language of section, and failing to properly consider admissible extrinsic aids reflecting intention of Alberta Legislature to change the common law – Limitations Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. L-12, s. 12.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30449                     Crown in Right of Alberta as represented by the Minister responsible for Alberta Human Resources and Employment v. Director of the Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (Alta.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Major, Fish and Abella JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Edmonton), Number 0203‐0344‐AC, dated May 10, 2004, is dismissed.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Alberta (Edmonton), numéro 0203‐0344‐AC, daté du 10 mai 2004, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional law - Human rights - Equality - Discrimination of the basis of marital status - Widows’ Pension Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. W-7.5 - Legislation providing pension to low income widows and widowers aged 55 to 66 - Whether a complaint brought pursuant to the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. H-11.7 must identify an individual victim of an alleged contravention of that Act - Whether the Legislature has constitutional authority to empower a human rights panel to direct future administration and application of legislation that it has found to contravene the HRCMA - Whether the HRCMA empowers a human rights panel to direct the future administration and application of the legislation that contravenes that Act, or whether a panel is charged to repair discrimination suffered by individuals whose circumstances are before it - Whether the Widows’ Pension Act, which grants benefits similar to benefits available to seniors to low-income widows near retirement age, discriminations against divorced women with deceased ex-husbands, who were not entitled to spousal support after divorce?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30608                    Natalie Luffer, Henry Sztern, Henry Sztern & Associés Inc. v. H.H. Davis & Associés Inc., Alain Lafontaine, ès qualités de Surintendant associé, Officier de la publicité des droits (Que.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐014530‐042, dated September 24, 2004, is dismissed with costs to the respondents H.H. Davis & Associés Inc. and Alain Lafontaine, ès qualités de Surintendant associé.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐014530‐042, daté du 24 septembre 2004, est rejetée avec dépens en faveur des intimés H.H. Davis & Associés Inc. et Alain Lafontaine, ès qualités de Surintendant associé.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Commercial Law - Bankruptcy - Civil  procedure - Judgments and orders - Pre-trial procedure - Seizure before judgment - Whether section 5(3)(e) and 14.03(1)(b) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act  give the right to the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, on its own or through its agents, to conduct a search without a court ordered search warrant - Whether a Federal court order of the specific nature of an Anton Piller Order gives the right to the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, on its own or through its agents, to conduct a search - Whether a search executed  under the circumstances raised in this Application supersede those rights guaranteed by sections 8  and 24 (1)  and 24 (2)  of the Canadian Charter  of Human Rights and Freedom and section 24.1 of the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedom - Whether the Quebec Court of Appeal erred by concluding that « D’autre part, l’appelante et la mise en cause exerçaient les pouvoirs, devoirs et functions prévus aux articles 5 (3) e) et 14.03 de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité », completely ignoring the fact that the seizure was based on allegations that were adjudicated to be completely unproven and the document « Offer to Purchase », upon which the seizure itself was grounded was illegally obtained in violation of the Canadian and Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Whether the Québec Court of Appeal erred in substituting it’s own judgment in place of the Lower Court’s judgment, where no manifest error in law or fact was established and with the Lower Court having had the benefit of a lengthy hearing of testimony and evidence of numerous witnesses.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30549                    Assunta Mellichio Baldino, Fernando Baldino c. Hammadi Sabar, Dominique Verhas (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐014361‐042, daté du 12 juillet 2004, est rejetée sans dépens.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐014361‐042, dated July 12, 2004, is dismissed without costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit commercial – Vente – Vices cachés – La Cour du Québec a-t-elle erré dans l’appréciation de la preuve? – La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en rejetant la requête pour permission d’appel?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30511                    Société canadienne de métaux Reynolds, Limitée v. Deputy Minister of Revenue of Quebec, Attorney General of Quebec (Que.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐011449‐014, dated June 17, 2004, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐011449‐014, daté du 17 juin 2004, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional Law – Taxation – Statutes – Retroactive statute enacted during court proceedings relating to subject-matter of legislation – Statute has the effect of removing cause of action – Whether the lower courts erred by holding that the retroactive statute did not violate the principles of the Rule of Law, of the separation of powers and of judicial independence in the circumstances and was not unconstitutional as a result.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30495                    Leslie Greenberg, Nelson Greenberg v. Michael Gruber (Que.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐014103‐048, dated May 27, 2004, is dismissed with costs.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐014103‐048, daté du 27 mai 2004, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law – Company law – Remedies – “Oppression” –  Prescription – Whether the lower courts erred in holding that the Civil Code of Québec was applicable to determine the prescription applicable to a recourse under s. 241  of the Canada Business Corporations Act , R.S. 1985, c. C-44  – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent’s claim to ownership of the shares was not prescribed? – What is the applicable prescription period for claims of oppression?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30497                     Alliance professionnelle des infirmières et infirmiers auxiliaires du Québec c. Hôpital Jean‐Talon (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐013095‐039, daté du 4 juin 2004, est rejetée avec dépens.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐013095‐039, dated June 4, 2004, is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Droit du travail - Arbitrage - Convention collective - Régime d’assurance-salaire - Définition d’invalidité - Un arbitre excède-t-il sa juridiction lorsque, dans l’interprétation des droits découlant d’un régime d’assurance-salaire intégré à la convention collective, il ajoute des éléments étrangers à la convention collective convenue entre les parties? - En restreignant les bénéfices du régime d’assurance-salaire aux seuls salariés pour qui la médecine peut offrir un espoir de guérison, la décision de la Cour d’appel conduit-elle à un résultat discriminatoire?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

7.1.2005

Before / Devant:   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondents’ response

Sam Stabile

v. (30594)

Lucia Milani, et al. (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de la réponse des intimés

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to January 20, 2005.

10.1.2005

Before / Devant:   ABELLA J.

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum and book of authorities of the intervener the Attorney General of Ontario and to present oral argument at the hearing of the appeal

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30021)

René Luther Hamilton (Alta.) (Crim.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt du mémoire et du recueil de sources de l’intervenant le procureur général de l’Ontario, et en vue de présenter une plaidoirie orale  lors de l’audition de l’appel

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the intervener, the Attorney General of Ontario, for an order extending the time to serve and file its factum to January 6, 2005 and its book of authorities to January 7, 2005 and for an order permitting the said intervener to present oral argument at the hearing of this appeal.

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion of the intervener, the Attorney General of Ontario, for an order extending the time to serve and file its factum to January 6, 2005 and its book of authorities to January 7, 2005, is granted.

The said intervener is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding fifteen (15) minutes at the hearing of this appeal.

10.1.2005

Before / Devant:   ABELLA J.

Further order on motion for leave to intervene

BY / PAR:              Canadian Civil Liberties Association

IN / DANS:            Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30021)

René Luther Hamilton (Alta.) (Crim.)

Autre ordonnance relative à une requête en autorisation d’intervention

UPON APPLICATION by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the order of October 14, 2004;

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said intervener is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding fifteen (15) minutes at the hearing of the appeal.

11.1.2005

Before / Devant:   MAJOR J.

Motion for additional time to present oral argument

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30063)

Stephen Frederick Marshall, et al. (N.S.)

Requête en prolongation du temps alloué pour la plaidoirie orale

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the appellant for an order extending the time for oral argument on this appeal and cross-appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion is dismissed without prejudice to the parties to renew the application before the Court hearing the appeal subject to the condition that the time used for the application will count against the one hour allotted for the appeal.

12.1.2005

Before / Devant:   MAJOR J.

Motion for leave to intervene in the application for leave to appeal

BY / PAR:              College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

IN / DANS:            The College of Physicians and

Surgeons of British Columbia

v. (30595)

Victoria McClelland, et al. (B.C.)

Requête en autorisation d’intervenir dans la demande d’autorisation d’appel

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

UPON APPLICATION by College of Physicians of Ontario for leave to intervene in the above mentioned application for leave to appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion is dismissed without prejudice to the applicant’s right to apply for leave to intervene in the appeal, in the usual manner, if the Court grants the application for leave to appeal.

12.1.2005

Before / Devant:   BASTARACHE J.

Motion for directions

Terrence Doyle

v. (30519)

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

Demande d’instructions

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the applicant for directions regarding the filing of supplemental material in the above mentioned application for leave to appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The applicant is directed to serve and file the supplemental material in the application for leave to appeal by January 17, 2005.

13.1.2005

Before / Devant:   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

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

Zbigniew Belz, et al.

v. (30593)

Elizabeth Rogacki (Ont.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to January 10, 2005.

13.1.2005

Before / Devant:   MAJOR J.

Motion for leave to intervene

BY / PAR:              International Trademark Association

IN / DANS:            Kirkbi AG, et al.

v. (29956)

Ritvik Holdings Inc./Gestions Ritvik Inc. (now operating as Mega Bloks Inc.) (FC)

Requête en autorisation d’intervenir

DISMISSED WITH COSTS / REJETÉE AVEC DÉPENS

UPON APPLICATION by the International Trademark Association for leave to intervene in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the International Trademark Association, is dismissed with costs to the appellants.

13.1.2005

Before / Devant:   BASTARACHE J.

Motion to strike

Regroupement des marchands actionnaires Inc.

v. (30677)

Métro Inc., et al. (Que.)

Requête en radiation

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

À LA SUITE D’UNE DEMANDE des intimées visant à obtenir la radiation de parties de la demande d’autorisation d’appel et une prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt de leur réponse;

ET APRÈS EXAMEN de la documentation déposée;

IL EST PAR LA PRÉSENTE ORDONNÉ CE QUI SUIT:

La requête visant à obtenir la radiation de parties de la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens.  Les intimées pourront signifier et déposer leur réponse dans les 30 jours suivant la présente ordonnance.

14.1.2005

Before / Devant:   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

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

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30063)

Stephen Frederick Marshall, et al. (N.S.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti à l’intervenant le procureur général de la Nouvelle-Écosse pour signifier et déposer son recueil de sources

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to January 10, 2005.

11.1.2004

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30514)

B.W.P.  (Man.)

13.1.2005

Sa Majesté la Reine

c. (30384)

Jean-Paul Larche (Qc)

- et entre -

Sa Majesté la Reine

c. (30384)

L’Honorable juge Robert Sansfaçon, ès qualités de juge de la Cour du Québec, et autre (Qc)

13.1.2005

B.V.N.

v. (30512)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

14.1.2005

CORAM:               Chief Justice McLachlin and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30021)

René Luther Hamilton (Alta.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

James C. Robb, Q.C., and Steven M. Bilodeau for the appellant.

F. Kirk MacDonald for the respondent.

Christopher Webb for the intervener Attorney General of Ontario.

Andrew K. Lokan for the intervener Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

14.1.2005

CORAM:               Chief Justice McLachlin and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.

Joanne Leonelli‐Contino

v. (30100)

Joseph Contino (Ont.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Deidre D. Smith, Susan E. Milne and Gary Joseph for the appellant.

Thomas G. Bastedo, Q.C., and Samantha Chousky for the respondent.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

17-18.1.2005

CORAM:               Chief Justice McLachlin and Major, Bastarache, LeBel, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30005)

Joshua Bernard, et al. (N.B.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

- AND -

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30063)

Stephen Frederick Marshall, et al. (N.S.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

William B. Richards, Sylvain Lussier, Pierre Castonguay and Iain R.W. Hollett for the appellants/respondents on cross-appeal (30005).

William Daniel Delaney, Alexander MacBain Cameron and James Clarke for the appellant/respondents on cross-appeal (30063).

Bruce H. Wildsmith, Q.C., and Eric A. Zscheile for the respondents/appellants on cross-appeal (30005 & 30063).

Mitchell R. Taylor and Charlotte Bell, Q.C., for the intervener Attorney General of Canada (30005 & 30063).

Robert Ratcliffe and Mark Crow for the intervener Attorney General of Ontario (30005 & 30063).

René Morin pour l’intervenant Procureur général du Québec (30005 & 30063).

Alexander MacBain Cameron and William Daniel Delaney for the intervener Attorney General of Nova Scotia (30005).

Pierre Castonguay, Sylvain Lussier, William B. Richards and Iain R.W. Hollett for the intervener Attorney General of New Brunswick (30063).

John J.L. Hunter, Q.C., for the intervener Attorney General of British Columbia (30005 & 30063).

Robert Normey and Donald Kruk for the intervener Attorney General of Alberta (30005 & 30063).

Donald H. Burrage, Q.C., and Justin S.C. Mellor for the intervener Attorney General of Newfoundland & Labrador (30005 & 30063).

Mahmud Jamal and Neil Paris for the intervener New Brunswick Forest Products Assoc. (30005).

Thomas E. Hart and Harvey L. Morrison, Q.C., for the intervener Forest Products Ass. of Nova Scotia (30063).

Joseph E. Magnet and Andrew K. Lokan for the intervener Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (30005 & 30063).

D. Bruce Clarke for the interveners Keptin John Joe Sark, et al. (30005 & 30063).

Bryan P. Schwartz and Candice Metallic for the intervener Assembly of First Nation (30005 & 30063).

Robert J.M. Janes and Dominique Nouvet for the interveners Songhees Indian Band, et al. (30005 & 30063).

Daniel R. Thériault for the intervener Union of New Brunswick Indians (30005).

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

(30005)

19.1.2005

CORAM:               Chief Justice McLachlin and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.

Government of Saskatchewan

v. (29973)

Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. (Sask.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Thomson Irvine and Richard Hischebett for the appellant.

Steven Sofer, Neil G. Gabrielson, Q.C., Michelle Ouellette and Marshall Reinhart for the respondent.

S. David Frankel, Q.C., and David Schermbrucker for the intervener Attorney General of Canada.

Robin K. Basu, Mark Crow and Edward Burrow for the intervener Attorney General of Ontario.

Brigitte Bussières et Hugo Jean pour l’intervenant Procureur général du Québec.

Edward A. Gores for the intervener Attorney General of Nova Scotia.

Cynthia Devine for the intervener Attorney General of Manitoba.

R. Richard M. Butler for the intervener Attorney General of British Columbia.

Written submissions only by Ruth M. DeMone for the intervener Attorney General of P.E.I.

Written submissions only by Julie Desrosiers and Robert Cunningham for the interveners Canadian Cancer Society, et al.

Written submissions only by Ron A. Skolrood and Clifford G. Proudfoot for the intervener Western Convenience Stores Association.

ALLOWED, REASONS TO FOLLOW / ACCUEILLI, MOTIFS À SUIVRE

20.1.2005

CORAM:               Chief Justice McLachlin and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.

North Fraser Harbour Commission, et al.

v. (29971)

Environmental Appeal Board, et al. (B.C.) (Civil ) (By Leave)

Michael P. Carroll, Q.C., and Monika B. Gehlen for the appellants.

Elizabeth J. Rowbotham and Nancy E. Brown for the respondent Attorney General of British Columbia.

John R. Singleton, Q.C., and David G. Perry for the respondent BC Hydro and Power Authority.

Margot A. Venton and Robert V. Wright for the intervener Friends of the Earth et al.

ALLOWED WITH COSTS /ACCUEILLI AVEC DÉPENS

The appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA027158, 2003 BCCA 436, dated July 29, 2003, was heard this day and the following judgment was rendered:

The Chief Justice (orally) – The appeal is allowed for the reasons of Justice Rowles, dissenting in the Court of Appeal, with costs.

L’appel interjeté contre l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA027158, 2003 BCCA 436, en date du 29 juillet 2003, a été entendu aujourd’hui et le jugement suivant a été rendu:

[traduction]

La Juge en chef (oralement) – L’appel est  accueilli avec dépens, pour les raisons exposées par la juge Rowles, dissidente en Cour d’appel.

                                                 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

                                                      CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

                                                                                                                  - 2004 -    

             10/06/04

                                                                                                          - 2005 -