Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

August 24, 2001  1435 - 1455                                                              le 24 août 2001

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Ville de Repentigny

Alain-Claude Desforges

Bélanger Sauvé

c.  (28722)

Les Habitations de la Rive-Nord Inc., et al. (Qué.)

Michel Lalande

Deveau, Lavoie & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION 8.8.2001

Alfred Mayor

Pierre Blain

Blain, Thibaudeau

c.  (28724)

Jean-Pierre Semeniuk (Qué.)

Jean-Pierre Semeniuk

DATE DE PRODUCTION 9.8.2001

Daniel Taylor / D.J. Taylor & Assoc. Inc., et al.

Daniel Taylor

v. (28721)

Annie Elena Finnuk (Que.)

Julius Grey

Grey Casgrain

FILING DATE 7.8.2001

Roseland Farms Ltd.

Sidney Green, Q.C.

v. (28719)

Her Majesty the Queen (Man.)

Gerald L. Chartier

A.G. of Manitoba

FILING DATE 8.8.2001

Jamie Carpenter

Phillip N. Scarisbrick

v. (28720)

Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)

Valerie Hartney

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE  10.8.2001

The-Trinh Pham

The-Trinh Pham

c. (28728)

Hydro-Québec (Qué.)

Julie Lapierre

Marchand Lemieux

DATE DE PRODUCTION 7.8.2001

Quno Corporation

Eric L. Clark

Clark & Partners

v. (28729)

CIGNA Insurance Company of Canada (Que.)

Robert W. Mason

Lavery, de Billy

FILING DATE 7.8.2001

J.U.

Jean McBean, Q.C.

Family Law Office

v. (28725)

The Regional Director of Child Welfare (Alta.)

Antonella Soria

A.G. of Alberta

FILING DATE 9.8.2001

AUGUST  17, 2001 / LE 17 AOÛT 2001

CORAM:   Gonthier, Iacobucci and Arbour JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Iacobucci et Arbour

John Ford Bolt

v. (28632)

Marie Annette Bolt (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family Law - Division of Property - Setting aside a Separation Agreement - Whether courts should simply set aside duly negotiated separation agreements between equal parties each represented by separate and independent legal counsel, where both parties understood the nature and the consequences of the agreement- What is the effect of a sworn certificate of independent legal advice and an affidavit of counsel certifying that the party received legal advice, understood the nature and effect of the agreement and signed the agreement voluntarily - Whether the court should recognize a witness as an expert in order to accept that person’s opinion evidence on the mental state of a party.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 25, 1999

Ontario Superior Court of Justice

(Taliano J.)

Respondent’s counter-petition to set aside the separation agreement, granted

AUGUST 20, 2001 / LE 20 AOÛT 2001

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (28638)

Michael Donald Dahl  (Crim.)(Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law - Inchoate offences - Attempted murder - Mens rea - Whether the mens rea for the offence of attempted murder is limited to the intent to cause death, or whether it extends to the intent to cause bodily harm knowing that it is likely to cause death and being reckless whether death ensues - Whether this Court’s judgment in R. v. Ancio, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 225 ought to be reconsidered in order to expand the mens rea component of the offence of attempted murder.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Marian Plucinski

v. (28512)

Roderick H. Mackenzie (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Extension of time - Whether the British Columbia Court of Appeal erred in refusing to extend the time allowed for giving notice of appeal from a judgment of the British Columbia Supreme Court - Whether the British Columbia Court of Appeal erred in determining that the Applicant’s appeal had no merit.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse

c. (28436)

Bernard Genest et Gilles Genest (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., ch. C-12, art. 10.1 — Harcèlement en milieu de travail — Harcèlement sexuel — La Cour d’appel a-t-elle privé le Tribunal des droits de la personne de la compétence institutionnelle spécialisée qui lui est expressément attribuée en matière de discrimination et de harcèlement? — La prohibition des recours civils en cas de lésion professionnelle prévus par la Loi sur les accidents du Travail et les maladies professionnelles, L.R.Q., ch. A-3.001, art. 438, a-t-elle pour effet d’empêcher le Tribunal des droits de la personne d’exercer sa compétence?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Benoît Lacroix

v. (28513)

Dino’s T.V. Limited, Operating as North of the Border Flea Market and Anthony Di Cienzo (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Labour law - Whether the Superior Court of Justice was bound by a finding of fact made in the Tax Court of Canada - Whether the Applicant was an employee of the Respondent.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel

Gilles Boies

c. (28468)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve - Crédibilité des témoins - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en droit en rejetant l’appel du demandeur pour le seul motif que la question était relative à la crédibilité des témoins sans se pencher sur les erreurs manifestes du juge de première instance? - Le juge de première instance a-t-il erré en ne se prononçant pas sur la crédibilité plusieurs témoins de la défense qui contredisaient des éléments essentiels du témoignage de la victime et de sa crédibilité qui en était par le fait même gravement entachée? - Le verdict du juge de première instance est-il déraisonnable puisqu’il ne repose pas sur l’ensemble de la preuve pertinente présentée?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Le 19 mars 2001

Cour suprême du Canada

Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée

Gaétan Plante

c. (28634)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Procédure - Arrêt des procédures - Abus de procédures - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en déclarant que le demandeur n’avait pas fait la preuve d’une attitude vexatoire et oppressive de la part des autorités carcérales et que même dans l’hypothèse où il aurait fait cette preuve, il n’a pas établi avoir subi un préjudice? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit dans son interprétation en concluant qu’il n’existait pas de motifs cachés des autorités carcérales sous-tendant les promesses que ceux-ci lui ont faites de ne pas porter d’accusations criminelles contre lui à l’égard des événements du 12 avril 1994? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en droit en soulignant la disproportion évidente entre la gravité des accusations portées contre le demandeur par rapport aux comportements qu’il reproche aux autorités d’avoir eus à son endroit?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Chimitec Ltée

c. (28501)

Ordre des Chimistes du Québec (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Législation - Procédure - Droit des professions - Appel- Interprétation - Exercice illégal de la profession de chimiste professionnel - Exception - Quel est le rôle de la Cour d’appel? - Quel est le sens de l’expression «établissement industriel» énoncée au paragraphe 2 de l’article 16 de la Loi sur les chimistes professionnels, L.R.Q., ch. C-15?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie

Joel Marchand, a minor by his litigation guardian, Richard Allen Marchand, the said Richard Allen Marchand and Barbara Marchand

v. (28379)

Public General Hospital of Chatham (also known as the Public General Hospital),

A. Olsen, P. Colebrook, M. Want, G. Asher (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Trial - Fair trial - Bias - Barristers and solicitors - Misconduct - Whether the misconduct of counsel at trial, coupled with the failure of the trial judge to control that misconduct, may infringe a party’s right to a fair trial, and require appellate intervention to order a new trial -  Whether the failure of the trial judge to restrain the misconduct of counsel at trial creates a reasonable apprehension of bias.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

K.P.N. Holding Ltd.

v. (28649)

West Shore Ventures Limited (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Letters of Credit - Bankruptcy - Unjust Enrichment - Standing - Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in extending the principle of unjust enrichment in a commercial context in the absence of a breach of duty to the claimant - Whether the provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act  and the Commercial Tenancy Act limit the bankrupt’s obligations to three months’ rent - Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3  - Commercial Tenancy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 57.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

National Bank of Canada

v. (28517)

Western Surety Company (N.B.)

AND BETWEEN:

Western Surety Company

v. (28517)

National Bank of Canada (N.B.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Suretyship - Creditor and debtor - Mechanics’ liens - Statutes - Interpretation - Fairness of trial - Did the appellate court err in deciding the case on issues which were neither raised in the pleadings, at trial, in the appeal documents nor at the appeal hearing and which the Applicant was not given the opportunity to address - As between a bank assignee of book debts and a surety company, who has the right to any monies owing from the owner to the contractor - Whether the appellate court erred in holding that s. 2 of the Mechanics’ Lien Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. M-6 rendered the trust provision in s. 3 inapplicable in this case.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION / DEMANDE DE RÉEXAMEN

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel

Rénald Fortin c. Compagnie d’Assurance Wellington (Qué.) (Civile) (Autorisation) (28149)

AUGUST 23, 2001 / LE 23 AOÛT 2001

28447                    Marvin Androschuk and Nora Androschuk ‑ v. ‑ Kenneth Bell and Trimac Transportation Services Ltd. (Alta.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondents Kenneth Bell and Trimac Transportation Services Ltd.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur des intimés Kenneth Bell et Trimac Transportation Services Ltée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Motor vehicles - Negligence - Contributory negligence - Whether the anachronism of the doctrine of last clear chance been fully replaced by the apportionment of liability provided for in the Contributory Negligence Act of Alberta and in similar statutes in the other common law jurisdictions of Canada - Whether the Motor Transport Act (Alberta) and similar statutes and regulations in other Canadian jurisdictions meant to regulate the inherently dangerous activity of commercial trucking, expressly or implicitly place an onus on truckers to show that a failure to respect safety standards has not contributed to a motor vehicle accident.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

March 8, 2001

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

28463                    Patricia B. MacCulloch ‑ v. ‑ Stewart McInnes & McInnes Cooper & Robertson (N.S.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Damages - Property law - Wills - Whether the Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia erred in dismissing the Applicant’s cross-appeal on the quantum of damages awarded against the Respondents.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

March 19, 2001

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

28234                    Christian Carrier ‑ c. ‑ Jean Rochon, ès qualités Ministre de la Santé et des Services Sociaux, Fédération des médecins spécialistes du Québec et Procureur général du Québec (Qué.) (Civile)

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

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée avec dépens en faveur des intimés et du mis en cause.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondents and to the mis en cause.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail – Droit des professions – Médecins spécialistes – Entente relative à la rémunération des médecins spécialistes conclue entre le ministre de la Santé et la Fédération des médecins spécialistes – Entente établit un taux de rémunération moindre pour les jeunes médecins – Compétence exclusive du conseil d’arbitrage en matière d’interprétation de l’entente – L’entente est-elle illégale parce que ultra vires? – Loi sur l’assurance-maladie, L.R.Q., ch. A-29, art. 19, 21, 54 et 57 – L’entente est-elle discriminatoire à l’endroit des jeunes médecins? – Charte canadienne des droits et libertés , art. 7  et 15  – Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., ch. C-12, art. 1, 4, 10, 13, 17, 19 et 46 – Procédure civile – Tribunaux – Recours collectif – Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q., ch. C-25, art. 1002 et 1003 – La Cour supérieure est-elle compétente pour connaître d’une demande en recours collectif relative à l’entente?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

28441                    EDBE Consulting Limited ‑ v. ‑ Union Gas Limited, Union Gas Investments Limited, Enron Oil Canada and Mark Resources Inc. (Alta.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contract - Interpretation of Contracts - Agreement for consulting services provide for cash and overriding royalties - Termination Agreement continues certain provisions of first Agreement - Whether the question of whether a contractual obligation applies to a future event or is to be limited to the facts as existed at the date of the contract, does the doctrine of “commercial certainty” require that the contract be interpreted so as to limit its effect to the facts as they existed at the date of the contract?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

March 2, 2001

Supreme Court of Canada

Application for leave to appeal filed

28439                    Gunnar Kjelstrup Madsen, Bruce Chutka, Mary Ann Madsen, Stephen Funk, Larry J. Lee, Ken Grunenberg, Rose Heinekey and Wallace T. Oppal ‑ v. ‑ Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.) (Civil)

CORAM:               The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Inadequate consideration - Non-arm’s length transactions - Partnerships - Minister of National Revenue finding that purchase of certain equipment by partnership was not made at arm's length - Section 69(1)(a) of Income Tax Act, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63, consequently applying to deem purchaser to have acquired equipment at fair market value - Whether “as if” rule contained in s. 96 of Act supercedes general law of partnerships for purposes of computing income or loss of partners - Whether a partnership can ever be a “taxpayer” under the Act - How arm’s length concept should be applied to a partnership, if at all, in context of computing income of partners in a partnership.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

31.7.2001

Before  / Devant:   THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Miscellaneous motions

Harinder Jadwani

    v. (28539)

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

Autres requêtes

GRANTED / ACCORDÉES  Decision on the miscellaneous motion on behalf of the applicant for leave to file his application for leave to appeal notwithstanding the printing is on the right hand side and for leave to file the lower court judgments under separate cover.

31.7.2001

Before /  Devant:   THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Motion to state a constitutional question

BY / PAR:   Patricia Babcock, et al.

IN DANS:              Attorney General of Canada on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada and in his capacity as Minister of Justice, et al.

     v. (28091)

Patricia Babcock, et al. (B.C.)

Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   The notices of intervention are to be filed on or before September 10, 2001.

The appellants shall be permitted to serve and file a reply factum of no more than 30 pages within six (6) weeks after service of the respondents’ factum.

Is s. 39  of the Canada Evidence Act , RSC 1985, c. C-5  of no force or effect, in whole or in part, pursuant to s. 52  of the Constitution Act ,  1982  by reason of one or both of the preamble to and s. 96  of the Constitution Act, 1867 ?

L’art. 39  de la Loi sur la preuve au Canada , L.R.C. 1985, ch. C-5 , est-il inopérant en totalité ou en partie en vertu de l’art. 52  de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1982  en raison du préambule ou de l’art. 96  de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867  ou des deux?

1.8.2001

Before  / Devant:   THE REGISTRAR

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

Transamerica Life Insurance Company of Canada

     v. (28163)

Maria Oldfield (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le dossier, mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’appelante

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to July 31, 2001.

2.8.2001

Before  / Devant:   GONTHIER J.

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

Harry Catarat (deceased) and James Albert Sylvestre

    v. (28702)

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Saskatchewan, et al. (Sask.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer la demande d’autorisation

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to September 30, 2001.

10.8.2001

Before  / Devant:   THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Motion to expedite the appeal

Bell Express Vu Limited Partnership

    v. (28227)

Richard Rex, et al. (B.C.)

Requête visant à accélérer l’appel

DENIED / REFUSÉE

UPON APPLICATION by counsel for the appellant for an order fixing a schedule for the early service and filing of factums and other materials, and for an order fixing a hearing date during the first week of the Fall 2001 session;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

(1)               The motion on behalf of the appellant for an order fixing a schedule for the early service and filing of factums and other materials, and for an order fixing a hearing date during the first week of the Fall session is denied;

(2)               The appeal shall be inscribed for the Fall 2001 session.  The respondent’s factum shall be filed by  September 14, 2001 and the Interveners factum shall be filed by October 12, 2001.  The hearing of the appeal shall be scheduled during the month of December 2001.

14.8.2001

Before / Devant:   IACOBUCCI J.

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

Valery I. Fabrikant

    v. (28391)

Dr. Serge Corbin (Qué.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer la demande d’autorisation

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the applicant Valery I. Fabrikant for an order extending the time to serve and file a complete application for leave to appeal to October 1, 2001;

AND HAVING READ the material filed ;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application for an extension of time is dismissed.

17.8.2001

Before  / Devant:   LE REGISTRAIRE

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer la réponse de l’intimée

Gilles Boies

    c. (28468)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 12 juillet 2001.

17.8.2001

Before /  Devant:   IACOBUCCI  J.

Motion for a stay of execution

John Ford Bolt

    v. (28632)

Marie Annette Bolt (Ont.)

Requête en vue de surseoir à l’exécution

REFERRED to the panel seized of the application for leave to appeal  / RÉFÉRÉE à la formation saisie de la demande d’autorisation d’appel

20.8.2001

Before /  Devant:   LE REGISTRAIRE

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

Louise Gosselin

    c. (27418)

La procureure générale du Québec (Qué.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 25 juillet 2001, nunc pro tunc.

7.8.2001

Chee K. Ling

v. (28315)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

7.8.2001

Ruth A. Laseur

v. (28370)

Workers’ Compensation Board of Nova Scotia, et al. (N.S.)

7.8.2001

Donald Martin

v. (28372)

Workers’ Compensation Board of Nova Scotia, et al. (N.S.)

16.8.2001

Le Procureur général du Québec

c. (28417)

Laurent Laroche, et al. (Qué.)

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

- 2001 -

- 2002 -