Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

April 9, 1998  561 - 646                                                                         le 9 avril 1998

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

W.A. @ W.M.D.

Bob P. Hrycan

Shumiatcher Hrycan

v. (26398)

Her Majesty The Queen (Sask.)

Carol Snell, Q.C.

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 30.3.1998

Michael Lucian Gwynne

Stan Guenther

Rush Crane Guenther

v. (26501)

Minister of Justice (B.C.)

Janet Henchey

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 13.3.1998

Silverside Computer Systems Inc.

Jacques Bernier

Bennett Jones Verchere

v. (26507)

The Minister of National Revenue et al. (F.C.A.)

Eric A. Noble

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 5.3.1998

Roger Cornelius Russell Yorke

Patrick J. Duncan, Q.C.

Beveridge, Lambert & Duncan

v. (26508)

Her Majesty The Queen (N.S.)

David C. Meadows

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 9.3.1998

Gheorghe Vlad

Gheorghe Vlad

v. (26509)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

Arnold Schlayer

A.G. of Alberta

FILING DATE 6.3.1998

Ndem Belende Kouldjim

Ndem Belende Kouldjim

v. (26511)

University of Ottawa et al. (Ont.)

Philip Spencer, Q.C.

Cassels, Brock & Blackwell

FILING DATE 9.3.1998

Patricia A. Burke

John L. MacDougall, Q.C.

MacLeod MacDougall Crane & Parkman

v. (26512)

Workers’ Compensation Board of Prince Edward Island et al. (P.E.I.)

Linda Gaudet

Human Resources - Management Services Inc.

FILING DATE 9.3.1998

Mary Robinson et al.

Robert B. Goodwin

v. (26513)

Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)

Robert Gosman

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 9.3.1998

Daryl Bax

Ian T. Tulloch

Tulloch & Tulloch

v. (26515)

The Workers’ Compensation Board (Sask.)

Robert G. Richards

MacPherson Leslie & Tyerman

FILING DATE 12.3.1998

M.S.

M.S.

v. (26516)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Donnaree Nygard

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 10.3.1998

John W. Harvey Real Estate Co. Ltd. et al.

Bruce A. Macdonald

Sullivan, Mahoney

v. (26517)

Grantley Spence et al. (Ont.)

Donald E. Morris

Lazier, Hickey, Langs, O’Neal

FILING DATE 16.3.1998

Collie Woollen Mills Ltd. et al.

Shawn W. Minnis

Perley-Robertson, Panet, Hill & McDougall

v. (26518)

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

Donald J. Rennie

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 16.3.1998

Linda Tyndall

Sidney Green, Q.C.

v. (26519)

Local 511, Sheeters, Deckers & Cladders Section of the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Assoc. (Man.)

Mel Myers, Q.C.

Myers Weinberg Kussin Weinstein Bryk

FILING DATE 18.3.1998

Le sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec

Richard Dubois

Veillette & Associés

c. (26520)

Béton St-Pierre Inc. (Qué.)

Christine Jutras

Jutras & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 13.3.1998

Agostinho Silva Bonanca et al.

John G. Walsh

v. (26521)

Donald P. Jones et al. (Ont.)

Jeremy J. Deveraux

McCarthy, Tetrault

FILING DATE 18.3.1998

Le sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec

Richard Dubois

Veillette & Associés

c. (26524)

Daniel St-Pierre (Qué.)

Christine Jutras

Jutras & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 13.3.1998

Lorraine Marie Dopf

Timothy W. Pearkes

Timothy W. Pearkes Law Corporation

v. (26525)

The Royal Bank of Canada (B.C.)

N. Victoria Gray, Q.C.

Bull, Housser & Tupper

FILING DATE 16.3.1998

Conrad Boffo

Clayton C. Ruby

Ruby & Edwardh

v. (26526)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

Trevor Shaw

Crown Law Office Criminal

FILING DATE 19.3.1998

Thalayasingam Sivakumar

Lorne Waldman

Jackman, Waldman & Associates

v. (26530)

Her Majesty The Queen et al. (F.C.A.)

Claire A.H. le Riche

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 20.3.1998

Innopac Inc.

Paul J. Pape

v. (26531)

Robert J. Reynolds (Ont.)

R.S. Harrison

Fasken, Campbell, Godfrey

FILING DATE 20.3.1998

David Taggart et al.

Wayne Paul Cipollone

v. (26532)

Brancato Construction Ltd. et al. (Ont.)

Raymond H. Raphael

Raymond H. Raphael & Associate

FILING DATE 20.3.1998

Alta Limitée et al.

Benoît Roussy

Guy & Gilbert

c. (26533)

La Corporation des maîtres mécaniciens en tuyauterie du Québec et al. (Qué.)

Jean Morin

Grondin, Poudrier, Bernier

DATE DE PRODUCTION 23.3.1998

Her Majesty The Queen

A.G. of N.S.

v. (26535)

Richard Floyd Oickle (N.S.)

Muttart, Tufts, DeWolfe & Coyle

FILING DATE 23.3.1998

Albert Baxter Bennett Sewell

Albert B.B. Sewell

v. (26536)

R.J. Hnatyshyn et al. (Ont.)

Jan Brongers

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 23.3.1998

Her Majesty The Queen (Transport Canada)

Henry S. Brown, Q.C.

Gowling, Strathy & Henderson

v. (26537)

Thomas Watt (F.C.A.)

Denis J. Power, Q.C.

Nelligan Power

FILING DATE 23.3.1998

Rival Company of Canada Ltd. et al.

Mortimer G. Freiheit

Stikeman, Elliott

v. (26538)

Thomas J. Baxter et al. (Qué.)

Gordon Kugler

Kugler Kandestin

FILING DATE 24.3.1998

Vera Marie Hagen et al.

J. Darryl Carter

Carter, Lock & Horrigan

v. (26541)

Carl Gustav Stromner et al. (Alta.)

Scott Schlosser

Schlosser, Nikel, Pentelechuk & Wood

FILING DATE 25.3.1998

Kyle Johnston

Hector J. MacIsaac

v. (26522)

M & E Holdings (N.S.)

J. Gregory MacDonald

Goodman MacDonald Patterson

FILING DATE 17.3.1998

Garrett Young

Derek J. Hogan

v. (26542)

Her Majesty The Queen (Nfld.)

Wayne Gorman

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 25.3.1998

Richard Alan Noname

Simon Renouf

Pringle, Renouf, MacDonald & Associates

v. (26543)

Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)

Richard Taylor

Agent of the Min. of Justice for the Province of Alberta

FILING DATE 26.3.1998

Pierre Trudel

Lucie Guimond

de Grandpré, Godin

c. (26544)

Sûreté du Québec et al. (Qué.)

Patrice Claude

Bernard, Roy & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.3.1998

Alan Christiansen

Murray L. Engelking

Campbell & Co.

v. (26545)

Paramount Developments Corp. (Alta.)

Murray K. Olsen

Stuffco Olsen

FILING DATE 27.3.1998

John Carlos Terceira

James Lockyer

Pinkofsky Lockyer

v. (26546)

Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)

Carol A. Brewer

Min. of the A.G.

FILING DATE 27.3.1998

Cargill Ltd.

Richard W. Pound, Q.C.

Stikeman, Elliott

v. (26547)

Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)

Gérald L. Chartier

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 27.3.1998

William Scott Sim

William Scott Sim

v. (26548)

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

Ian McCowan

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 30.3.1998

Greggory Tremblay

T.F. Koskie

Koskie & Co.

v. (26549)

Her Majesty The Queen (Sask.)

C.A. Snell, Q.C.

Dept. of Justice

FILING DATE 30.3.1998

T.G.

Vincent T. Calderhead

Nova Scotia Legal Aid

v. (26550)

Her Majesty The Queen (N.S.)

Kenneth W.F. Fiske

Public Prosecution Service

FILING DATE 30.3.1998

Jean-Marie Roussel

Roxanne Hardy

Boucher, Hardy, Turcotte, Therrien

c. (26551)

Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)

Ginette Maillet

Procureur général du Québec

DATE DE PRODUCTION 6.4.1998

Virgil Lee Big Eagle

Richard W. Bell

Bell Law Office

v. (26553)

Her Majesty The Queen (Sask.)

D. Murray Brown

Saskatchewan Justice

FILING DATE 30.3.1998

N. H. et al.

Julius H. Grey

Grey, Casgrain

v. (26555)

Hubert Morrisseau et al. (B.C.)

James G. Martin

FILING DATE 2.4.1998

W.R. Scott Equipment Ltd.

Eugene J. Erler

Durocher Simpson

v. (26556)

Guardian Insurance Co. of Canada (Alta.)

Gregory W. Jaycock

Parlee McLaws

FILING DATE 3.4.1998

Jayme Farber

Raymond Stancer

Stancer, Gossin

v. (26557)

Townsgate 1 Limited (Ont.)

David M. Golden

Torkin, Manes, Coben & Arbus

FILING DATE 3.4.1998

Roland Home Improvements Ltd. et al.

Shahnaz Dadvand (Filzmaier)

v. (26528)

National Bank of Canada (Ont.)

David B. Debenbam

Yegendorf, Brazeau, Seller

FILING DATE 17.3.1998

MARCH 27, 1998 / LE 27 MARS 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

                                                                                       Douglas Earl Guyatt

                                                                                                v. (26332)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Unreasonable verdict - Criminal Code  s. 686(1) (a)(iii) - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that s. 686(1)(a)(iii) of the Criminal Code  does not provide an appellate court with the power to quash a criminal conviction where the evidence is weak and the jury charge is deficient - Reasonable doubt - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the jury were properly instructed on the application of reasonable doubt to the evidence - Expert evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge did not err in failing to withdraw from the jury gravely prejudicial expert evidence of little or no probative value.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                                Kelly Dow

                                                                                                v. (26359)

                                                                  The United States of America (Crim.)(B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Extradition.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

November 19, 1996

Supreme Court of British Columbia (Callaghan J.)

Warrant of committal issued

November 4, 1997

Court of Appeal for British Columbia

(Southin, Cumming, Prowse JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

January 15, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada (L’Heureux-Dubé J.)

Motion to extend time to apply for leave to appeal to March 1, 1998 granted

March 9, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal, motion for the extension of time, motion to file a lengthy memorandum of argument filed

March 18, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

(Major J.)

Motion to extend time to apply for leave to appeal to March 9, 1998 and to file a lengthy memorandum of argument that does not comply with the rules granted

Power Workers’ Union, Milt Kowtecky, Betty Ann Bentley, Janice Porter, David Havil, Clark Meredith,

John Glenn, Chris Fleming, Enzo Bellan, John Cherwinsk, Bill McGowan, Ed Gullett, Tom Livingstone, Larry Daines, Barry Woods, Steve Cavasin, Ken Sakawski, Rudy Kerec, Wayne Virage, Murray Easson,

Ann Marie Erkelens, Bert Nauta, Joe Lampman, Larry Slobodian, Frank Kramer, Rick Molata,

Dave Walker and Peter Bourrat

                                                                                                v. (26418)

                                   Lincoln Hydro Electric Commission and Corporation of Town of Lincoln (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Statutes - Interpretation - Power Corporation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P-18, s.28.2(6), as amended by the Power Corporation Amendment Act, 1994, S.O. 1994, c.31 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Boundary Adjustment Study did not constitute the record on which the Town of Lincoln relied to establish that it had regard to “the long-term potential growth and development of the municipal corporation” - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in placing the entire onus on the Applicants to put forward evidence establishing why, if the Town of Lincoln had regard to “the long-term potential growth and development of the municipal corporation,” it would have come to a contrary decision.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                              John Brigis

                                                                                                v. (26427)

                                                                    The St.Lawrence Seaway Authority (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Landlord tenant - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the applications judge that the requirements for a valid lease agreement were not met.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 8, 1993

Ontario Court of Justice (General Division)

(Kovacs J.)

Respondent’s application for a writ of possession dismissed; Applicant’s counter-application for declaration that a valid lease existed dismissed

October 30, 1997

Ontario Court of Appeal

(Finlayson, Doherty, Charron JJ.A.)

Applicant’s appeal dismissed

December 29, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

February 3, 1998

Supreme Court of Canada

Motion to adduce new evidence

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                                                         Serge Montplaisir

                                                                                                c. (26257)

                                                                           Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Détermination de la peine - Preuve - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en “considérant que l’appel n’avait aucune chance de réussir”? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en refusant d’intervenir alors que, selon le demandeur, le juge au procès s’était basé pour rendre sa sentence sur des événements subséquents, se basant sur un affidavit que le demandeur avait produit dans d’autres dossiers alors même que des accusations étaient en cours sur ces événements - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en refusant au demandeur le secours d’un avocat, contrevenant ainsi aux dispositions de l’art. 2d) de la Déclaration canadienne des droits, 8-9 Éliz, II, ch. 44 dans L.R.C. (1985), Appendice III?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                       Jean Victor Beaulac

                                                                                                v. (25416)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Language rights - Whether the courts below applied the appropriate standard in the application of s. 530(4)  of the Criminal Code , which gives a trial judge the discretion to order a trial in the official language spoken by the accused.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

May 12, 1995

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Conviction: first degree murder

October 29, 1997

Court of Appeal for British Columbia

(Mcfarlane, Southin, Goldie JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

December 29, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

                                                                             Deschamps Pontiac Buick Ltée

                                                                                                c. (26379)

              Benoît Monette, ès qualités de commissaire du travail, et la succession de Raymond St-Georges (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Employeur et employé - Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Compétence - Plainte pour congédiement sans cause juste et suffisante - Congédiement déguisé - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en concluant que le commissaire du travail n’a pas commis une erreur juridictionnelle en interprétant le mot “congédiement” prévu aux art. 124 et 128 de la Loi sur les normes du travail, L.R.Q. 1977, ch. N-1.1? - La décision de la Cour d’appel quant à la portée de l’arrêt Farber c. Compagnie Royal Trust, [1997] 1 R.C.S. 846, et quant à la notion de “congédiement déguisé” dans le contexte des articles 124 et 128 est-elle erronée? - Subsidiairement, la décision du commissaire du travail concluant à un congédiement sans cause juste et suffisante et ordonnant la réintégration du plaignant est-elle manifestement déraisonnable?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                      Micheline Thibodeau

                                                                                                c. (26391)

                                                 Ville de Sept-Îles et Commission municipale du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Relations de travail - Municipalités - Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Libertés publiques - Congédiement - Enregistrement de conversations - Recevabilité en preuve - Vie privée - Droit à une défense pleine et entière - Principes de justice naturelle - Norme de contrôle applicable à la décision de la Commission municipale - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle commis une erreur en confirmant que la norme de contrôle de l’erreur manifestement déraisonnable était applicable à la décision de la Commission municipale?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

 Agbariya Shoshana, Astrug Elazar, Moti Fishman, Morris Freedman, Boris Galperin and Natalia Galperin,

Harvey Goodman, Manuel Goncalves, Michael Groisman in trust for Clara Groisman, Rachel Grundman

and Ynes Sibilia, Cathy Katz, Adolph Kleiner and Bella Kleiner, Yan Kosoi in trust for Eugene Dozortsev,

Anna Kosoi, Albert Kshoznicer and Barbara Kshoznicer, Fernando Goncalves and Russell Lazar,

Angel Mealia and Michael Mealia, Eli Mizrahi and Annette Mizrahi, Isaak Nemirovsky, Henry Petroff,

Eugeny Privis, Anna Prokopets and Mike Prokopets, Bentsian Prosmushkin and Alisa Prosmushkin,

Gary Tiz and Mike Groisman, Gary Tiz in trust for Lubov Tiz, and Warren Weisz

                                                                                                v. (26412)

Townsgate 1 Limited, 652 Steeles Investments Inc. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Contracts - Real property - Agreements of purchase and sale - Condominiums -  Whether agreements of purchase and sale were null and void because their formation was expressly prohibited under the Ontario New Homes Warranty Plan Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 350 (now R.S.O. 1990, c. 0.31) - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying the principles of law relating to illegality in the performance of contracts as opposed to the principles applying to illegal formation of a contract - Whether the Court of Appeal implied a condition of compliance with the legislation into the agreements of purchase and sale.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                    Deposit Insurance Corporation of Ontario

                                                                                                v. (26422)

                                                 Nesbitt, Burns Inc., Walter Zanewycz and Gregory Pilot (Ont.)

AND BETWEEN:

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario

v. (26422)

Nesbitt, Burns Inc., Walter Zanewycz, and Gregory Pilot (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Interpretation - Torts - Damages - Contribution and indemnity - Statutory immunity of the Deposit Insurance Corporation of Ontario - Is a claim for contribution and indemnity the same as a claim for damages? - Can a person who is protected by statutory immunity from actions or other proceedings for damages be liable to pay contribution or indemnity to someone who is liable to a plaintiff for those damages? - Is the beneficiary of a statutory immunity clause “unjustly enriched” if a defendant who is found liable to a plaintiff for damages cannot claim over against the beneficiary for contribution or indemnity?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                          Vlado Maljkovich

                                                                                                v. (26420)

John Maljkovich, Administrator, with will annexed of the estate of

Nada Maljkovich also known as Nadia Maljkovich (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Civil Procedure - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the Applicant’s request for an adjournment and the appeal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

December 11, 1995

Ontario Court of Justice (General Division)

(Jennings J.)

Applicant’s application for a declaration under the Family Law Act dismissed; Respondent’s motion for an order dismissing the Applicant’s application granted

October 30, 1997

Ontario Court of Appeal

(Finlayson, Doherty, Charron JJ.A.)

Applicant’s appeal dismissed

December 29, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

APRIL 7, 1998 / LE 7 AVRIL 1998

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

Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges McLachlin et Iacobucci

                                                                                    Lai Ling Yammie Kwan

                                                                                                v. (26408)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Charge to the jury - Reasonable doubt - Whether the trial judge’s charge to the jury on reasonable doubt was adequate - Whether out-of-court statements made by one accused that implicate a co-accused can be used to bolster accused’s testimony - Whether severance should be mandatory where an accused’s out-of-court statements that implicate a co-accused will be introduced as evidence - Whether the trial judge’s charge on the out-of-court statements of the Applicant's co-accused was deficient.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                        Erwin Franz Sillipp

                                                                                                v. (26409)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Criminal harassment - Whether s. 264 (criminal harassment) is contrary to ss. 2(b)  , 2(d)  and 7  of the Charter  - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in approving the charge to the jury on s. 264 (criminal harassment).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                          Sheila Robertson

                                                                                                v. (26448)

                                                                   Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and

 CIBC Mortgage Corporation (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Duty of care  - Whether the lower courts erred in determining the issue of liability and erred in failing to delineate the duty of care owed by the Respondents to the Applicant - Whether the lower courts erred in failing to apply Rainbow Industrial Caterers v. Canadian National Railway Co. [1991] 3 S.C.R. 3.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

                                                         Union des employés de commerce, local 501, T.U.A.C.

                                                                                                c. (26401)

                                           Arkwright Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Relations de travail - Responsabilité civile - Dommages-intérêts - Preuve - Responsabilité civile d’un syndicat pour les actes de vandalisme de certains de ses membres durant une grève légale - La Cour d’appel du Québec, à la majorité de ses membres, a-t-elle commis une erreur en condamnant l’association demanderesse au paiement de dommages-intérêts en l’absence de preuve de sa participation directe ou indirecte aux actes de vandalisme et en s’appuyant sur le principe que les grévistes sont sous le contrôle d’une association de salariés pendant une grève? - Application de l’arrêt United Steel Workers c. Gaspé Copper Mines, [1970] R.C.S. 362. 

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                                                                     Georges A. Rocheleau

                                                                                                c. (26425)

                                                   La Ville de Bedford, la Commission municipale du Québec et

                                                              la Société d’agriculture du Comté de Missisquoi

                                                                                                     - et -

                                           J.O. Lévesque Ltée, la Chambre de l’expropriation, le Club juridique,

                         le Procureur général du Québec, Guy R. Rocheleau et l’Officier de la publicité des droits

                                                            de la circonscription foncière de Missisquoi (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Procédure - Procédure civile - Actions - Prescription - Expropriation - Demandeur demandant d’être déclaré propriétaire de certains immeubles qui avaient été expropriés en 1973 - Réclamation subsidiaire en dommages-intérêts - Allégations de fraude - La prescription de six (6) mois de l’article 586 de la Loi sur les cités et villes, L.R.Q., ch. C-19, est-elle applicable en l’espèce? - Silence de l’acquéreur des lots expropriés - Rejet de l’action contre la Commission municipale du Québec.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

                                              Giuseppe Sansaloni, Mathilda Sansaloni, Stella Larosa Sansaloni

                                                                                                c. (26361)

                                                                                   Ville de Montréal (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Code civil - Action en dommages - Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., chap. C-12 - Actions des demandeurs en dommages contre la Ville de Montréal pour atteinte à leur vie privée rejetées - Appels rejetés - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle commis une erreur en rejetant les appels des demandeurs?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Cory, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Major et Binnie

                                                                                      Cortwright Christian

                                                                                                v. (26428)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Inconsistent verdicts - Res judicata - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply to a case in which a conviction is attacked on appeal on the basis that it is inconsistent with an acquittal that resulted from the same trial as did the conviction.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                                              Ernst Zündel

                                                                                                v. (26417)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Civil - Civil rights - Administrative law - Judicial review - Reasonable apprehension of bias - Citizenship - Statutes - Interpretation - Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act , R.S.C. 1985, c.C-23, s.38  - Citizenship Act,  R.S.C. 1985, c.C-29, s.19  - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining the test for impartiality for SIRC acting under s.19  of the Citizenship Act  - Whether that test is vague, arbitrary and capricious and contrary to s.7  of the Charter, and should be declared of no force or redefined under s.24(1)  of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying Brosseau v. Alberta Securities Commission, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 301 and in finding that SIRC did not act outside its statutory authority in the Heritage Front Report - Whether ss.19 and 20 of the Citizenship Act , s.38(c)(ii) of the CSIS Act and the definition of “threats to the security of Canada” in s.2(c) of the CSIS Act create a legislative scheme which is so subjective, speculative, arbitrarily discretionary and devoid of objective evidentiary requirement as to be contrary to ss.2 (b), 2 (c) and 7  of the Charter and should be declared of no force or effect by virtue of s.52  of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing or refusing to find SIRC exhibited systemic bias against the Applicant under the “open mind” test or the appropriate “informed bystander” test in these circumstances.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                         Abbott Laboratories, Limited and Abbott Laboratories

                                                                                                v. (26424)

                                                               Apotex Inc. and The Minister of Health Canada

(A-636-97, A-646-97)

BETWEEN:

                                                         Abbott Laboratories, Limited and Abbott Laboratories

                                                                                                    - and -

                                               Nu-Pharm Inc. and The Minister of Health Canada (F.C.A.)(Ont.)

(A-637-97, A-647-97)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Patents - Medicines - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in finding that the motions judge did not commit a reviewable error - Whether the Respondents’ preliminary application could be dispositive of the Applicants’ prohibition applications - Whether an expedited hearing should have been ordered on the preliminary application - Whether the decision in Abbott Laboratories, Ltd. v. Nu‐Pharm Inc. (1997), 132 F.T.R. 230 was res judicata of the prohibition applications - Whether the medicine was found to be terazosin hydrochloride dihydrate in Abbott Laboratories, Ltd. v. Nu‐Pharm Inc. - Whether the prohibition applications should have been dismissed.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:    Cory, Bastarache and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Cory, Bastarache et Binnie

                                                                                               K.V.N.G.W.

                                                                                                v. (26388)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Young Offenders - Transfer to ordinary court - Whether the test and onus articulated in R. v. M.(S.H.), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 446 should be applicable to 14 and 15 year old offenders given the many subsequent amendments to the Young Offenders Act - Whether the courts below gave proper consideration to ss. 3 and 16(2)(b) of the Young Offenders Act - Whether the Court of Appeal conducted a proper review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION -- REHEARING /

DEMANDE DE RÉEXAMEN -- NOUVELLE AUDITION

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et Bastarache

Laurent Brodeur Inc. c. Procureur général du Québec (Qué.)(26158)

APRIL 2, 1998 / LE 2 AVRIL 1998

26369                    ADBUSTERS MEDIA FOUNDATION - v. - CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION (B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci 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

Canadian Charter  - Civil - Civil Rights - Procedural law - Appeal - Mootness - Administrative law - Prerogative writs - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Appeal was moot - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the criteria for determining whether to hear a moot case - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a declaration was not an appropriate remedy - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding not to decide the appeal on an insufficient record of constitutional facts, if that insufficiency is the result of the Respondent’s decision to limit its defence at trial to the applicability of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in basing its decision not to decide the appeal on its possible effect on other broadcasters that were not parties to the appeal.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26311                    PAUL ARSENAULT - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that there was no misdirection regarding implied consent and reasonable doubt - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that no limiting instruction was required regarding the use of a prior consistent statement by the complainant and evidence of her virginity.          

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

June 9, 1995

Ontario Court of Justice (General Division)

(Eberhard J.)

Conviction:  Sexual assault

August 10, 1995

Ontario Court of Justice (General Division)

(Eberhard J.)

Sentence of imprisonment of two years less a day imposed

October 2, 1997

Court of Appeal for Ontario

(Labrosse and Charron JJ.A and  Campbell J.[ad hoc])

Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted and appeal against sentence dismissed

November 18, 1997

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

26429                    IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF 412316 ALBERTA LTD. - v. - ERNST & YOUNG INC. TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY FOR THE ESTATE OF RANDY MILES KLAPSTEIN (Alta.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The application for a stay of proceedings and the application for leave to appeal are dismissed with costs.

La demande d'arrêt des procédures et la demande d'autorisation d'appel sont rejetées avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Bankruptcy - Procedural law - Did bankrutpcy judge err in determining issue in summary manner? - Should a trial of the issue have been ordered.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26128                    PAUL MACCIOCCHI - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Whether the evidence of certain Crown witnesses was credible - Whether the trial judge erred in her factual findings - Whether the trial judge based her conclusions on hearsay evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26327                    YAK WAH CHEUNG - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci 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 - Narcotics - Wiretap - Interception of private communications - Standing to challenge - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that a person who is not a party to an intercepted private communication lacks the standing to object to its admissibility under ss. 8  and 24(2)  of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the test for investigative necessity under s. 186(1)  (b) of the Criminal Code  is satisfied where “there are reasonable, practical grounds for permitting the investigation to continue by means of intercepted communications”. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

April 7, 1994

Supreme Court of British Columbia (Fraser J.)

Conviction: conspiracy to import heroin

October 20, 1997

British Columbia Court of Appeal

(Newbury, Braidwood, Hall JJ.A.)

Appeal dismissed

26411                    WILLIAM D. DOHERTY, THOMAS DOHERTY JR., KATHERINE JOAN DOHERTY AND MARY-ANNE DOHERTY-GLOVER - v. - SHIRLEY JEAN DOHERTY AND PHILIP E. DOHERTY (N.B.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci 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 - Appeal - Rehearing - Property law - Wills - Undue influence - Joint bank accounts - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in refusing to grant a rehearing of the appeal to reconcile the inconsistent application of legal principles in this case and Steeves v. Steeves, (1997) 191 N.B.R. (2d) 293 (N.B.C.A.) - Whether the Court of Appeal misinterpreted or misapplied Vout v. Hay [1995] 2 S.C.R. 876  - Whether the Court of Appeal failed to apply accepted legal principles with respect to the presumption of undue influence - Whether the Court of Appeal failed to apply accepted legal principles with respect to the determination of beneficial ownership of money held in a joint bank account.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26383                    A.M.G. - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Procedure - Guilty plea - Plea Bargaining - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that the Crown’s failure to maintain its position on a plea bargain did not undermine the validity of the guilty plea or constitute a miscarriage of justice under s. 686(1)(a)(iii) of the Criminal Code .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26121                    AYTEL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC. - v. - REGIONAL ASSESSMENT COMMISSIONER, REGION NO. 23 AND THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF LONDON - and between - 705076 ONTARIO LIMITED - v. - REGIONAL ASSESSMENT COMMISSIONER, REGION NO. 23 AND THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF LONDON (Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci 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

Municipal law - Assessment - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to grant leave to appeal - Whether the Divisional Court exceeded its jurisdiction by misinterpreting the legislation - What are the appropriate principles of statutory interpretation which should be applied to the interpretation of taxing statutes and did the Divisional Court apply the correct test?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26338                    JACK MARKS, CHIEF OF POLICE OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO POLICE FORCE, ET AL v. MICHAEL ONIEL (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The motion 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 - Pre-Trial Procedure - Statement of Claims - Motion to amend statement of claim - Respondent granted amendment to statement of claim to seek a Charter remedy in a civil suit resulting from unsuccessful charge of robbery - Whether amendment should have been granted.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26381                    RITA D. CAPLAN v. THE MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (F.C.A.)(N.S.)

CORAM:               Cory, 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

Administrative law - Judicial Review - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in dismissing the application for judicial review.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 15, 1996

Pension Appeals Board (Chilcott, Ferg, McMahon JJ.)

Appeal dismissed

26328                    ALEXANDER RINGER v. ALEX CENTURAMI ET AL (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, 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 - Should a judge hearing a motion for summary judgement where plaintiff represented by counsel and defendant acted in person adjourn motion to allow the defendant to file evidence in the affidavit form even though the facts of the defendant’s case are stated in his defence - Should he take viva voce evidence from the defendant acting in person who has not filed an affidavit - Should he accept the facts in the statement of defence as facts relied by the defendant - are the facts in the statement of defence sufficient in place of a sworn affidavit - Rules 25.06(1), 25.07(3) and 39.03(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure  - Whether Court of Appeal erred.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26363                    CANADIAN PACIFIC LIMITED v. MATSQUI INDIAN BAND ET AL (F.C.A.)(B.C.)

CORAM:               Cory, 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 - Evidence - Appeal from an interlocutory judgment - For what purposes may Hansard be used as an aid to statutory interpretation - Whether, on an application to adduce additional evidence on an appeal, historical records are governed by different principles than more conventional and fact-specific forms of evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26375                    DARA WILDER v. HERSH WOLCH (Man.)

CORAM:               Cory, Major and Binnie JJ.

The motion for extenstion of time is granted, the motion to adduce new evidence is dismissed and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée, la requête pour déposer d'autres éléments de preuve est rejetée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Evidence - Civil procedure - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the Applicant’s motion to file further evidence upon questions of fact by affidavit evidence in the Court and in the alternative for an order directing that the judgment be set aside and granting leave to the Applicant to file a defence to the counterclaim - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the Applicant’s appeal of the trial judge’s decision granting default judgment based on a counterclaim when the money claimed in the counterclaim is the same as that which the Applicant denies owing as set out in the statement of claim.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26385                    CITIZENS’ LEGAL CHALLENGE INC. ET AL v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO (Ont.)

CORAM:               Cory, 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  - Municipal law - Municipal corporations - Municipal democracy - Whether the City of Toronto Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 2 infringes rights guaranteed under sections 2 (b), 2 (d), and 15(1)  of the Charter - Whether the City of Toronto Act, 1997 violates an implied constitutional norm or convention of “reasonable local autonomy” included in section 92(8)  of the Constitution Act, 1867  - Whether the manner and effect of amalgamating the Cities of Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, Toronto, York and the Borough of East York into the “City of Toronto” violates freedom of expression and freedom of association - Whether the City of Toronto Act, 1997 violates equality rights by reducing electoral representation, and by causing  adverse effect discrimination against the greater proportion of disadvantaged persons who live in the new City of Toronto as opposed to other parts of the Greater Toronto Area.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

APRIL 9, 1998 / LE 9 AVRIL 1998

26489                    IVAN WILLIAM MERVIN HENRY - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(B.C.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The application for the appointment of counsel and the application for leave to appeal are dismissed.

La demande de nomination d’un procureur et la demande d'autorisation d'appel sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Should Applicant be allowed to re-open Court of Appeal file.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26426                    PIERRE ANDRÉ GEORGES OTHELO - c. - SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE (Crim.)(Qué.)

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

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

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

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve - Agression sexuelle - Doute raisonnable - Appréciation de la preuve - Défense de croyance sincère mais erronée au consentement - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en confirmant que la preuve ne donnait pas ouverture à une défense de croyance sincère mais erronée au consentement? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en confirmant la condamnation prononcée par le juge de première instance?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

26392                    ROYAL BANK OF CANADA AND ERNST & YOUNG INC., TRUSTEE OF THE BANKRUPT CASWAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC. - v. - SPRUNG INSTANT STRUCTURES LTD. (Alta.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The motion to file additional submissions and to seek additional and alternative relief is dismissed. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

La requête visant à déposer d'autres arguments et à obtenir un autre redressement est rejetée. La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Creditor & debtor - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in effectively removing the requirement of lessors to register leases pursuant to the Personal Property Security Act, S.A. 1998, c. P-4.05 despite the clear intention of the Legislature to include leases.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

January 14, 1997

Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (Forsyth J.)

Respondent’s action for a declaration granted in part

26413                    DELOITTE & TOUCHE INC., TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY IN THE ESTATE OF METAL FABRICATING & CONSTRUCTION LTD. - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN THE RIGHT OF CANADA AS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE, BANK OF MONTREAL AND HUSKY OIL OPERATIONS LTD. (Sask.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci 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

Statutes - Interpretation - Taxation - Bankruptcy - Income Tax - Whether the interpretation imposed on section 224(1.2)  of the Income Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp .) in Minister of National Revenue v. Alberta (Treasury Branches) et al. [1996], 1 S.C.R. 963 should differ if read in light of section 71(2)  of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 , where a Requirement to Pay was issued to garnish debt for unremitted employee source deductions after the assignment-in-bankruptcy had occurred.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26380                    CATHRYN MESSER - v. - ALLAN MESSER (Sask.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.

The application for leave to cross-appeal and the application for leave to appeal are dismissed.

La demande d'autorisation d'appel-incident et  la demande d'autorisation d'appel sont rejetées.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Divorce - Maintenance - Quantum and duration of maintenance for former wife after twenty three year marriage - Wife occupied primarily as full time homemaker and mother throughout most of the marriage - Wife upgrading her work force skills prior to separation - Wife suffering from chronic fibro myalgia and unable to work on a full time basis after separation - Husband’s career progressing steadily throughout marriage in a credit union - Husband earning in excess of $100,000 per annum - Parties agreeing to division of all assets including husband’s pension - Each receiving $250,000 in assets - Trial judge ordering $800 per month in spousal support for four years - Court of Appeal ordering new trial - Support increased to $3,000 per month with no time limit - Reduced on appeal to $1,500 per month - Applicant appealing decision - Respondent cross-appealing on grounds that no support should be payable - S. 15(7)  of Divorce Act  - Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that trial judge had erred in determining quantum of spousal support.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

26177                    CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF TORONTO AND JACQUELINE MATZ - v. - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Iacobucci 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  - Criminal law - Corporate criminal liability - Freedom of religion - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the identification doctrine of corporate criminal liability - Whether the application of the identification doctrine to a non-profit religious corporation violates ss. 7 , 11 (d) and 2 (a) of the Charter - Trial - Juries - Equality rights - Whether the exclusion of non-citizens from jury service violates ss. 15 , 7  or 11 (d) of the Charter - Exclusion of evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to exclude the secondary evidence obtained as a result of the violation of s. 8  of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to find errors in the Vetrovec warning by the trial judge - Sentencing - Whether the Court of Appeal erred with respect to the principles applicable to sentence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY