This Bulletin is published at the direction of the Registrar and is for general information only. It is not to be used as evidence of its content, which, if required, should be proved by Certificate of the Registrar under the Seal of the Court. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, no responsibility is assumed for errors or omissions. |
|
Ce Bulletin, publié sous l'autorité du registraire, ne vise qu'à fournir des renseignements d'ordre général. Il ne peut servir de preuve de son contenu. Celle‑ci s'établit par un certificat du registraire donné sous le sceau de la Cour. Rien n'est négligé pour assurer l'exactitude du contenu, mais la Cour décline toute responsabilité pour les erreurs ou omissions. |
|
|
|
Subscriptions may be had at $200 per year, payable in advance, in accordance with the Court tariff. During Court sessions it is usually issued weekly. |
|
Le prix de l'abonnement, fixé dans le tarif de la Cour, est de 200 $ l'an, payable d'avance. Le Bulletin paraît en principe toutes les semaines pendant les sessions de la Cour. |
|
|
|
The Bulletin, being a factual report of recorded proceedings, is produced in the language of record. Where a judgment has been rendered, requests for copies should be made to the Registrar, with a remittance of $10 for each set of reasons. All remittances should be made payable to the Receiver General for Canada. |
|
Le Bulletin rassemble les procédures devant la Cour dans la langue du dossier. Quand un arrêt est rendu, on peut se procurer les motifs de jugement en adressant sa demande au registraire, accompagnée de 10 $ par exemplaire. Le paiement doit être fait à l'ordre du Receveur général du Canada. |
|
|
|
CONTENTS TABLE DES MATIÈRES
Applications for leave to appeal filed
Applications for leave submitted to Court since last issue
Oral hearing ordered
Oral hearing on applications for leave
Judgments on applications for leave
Judgment on motion
Motions
Notices of appeal filed since last issue
Notices of intervention filed since last issue
Notices of discontinuance filed since last issue
Appeals heard since last issue and disposition
Pronouncements of appeals reserved
Rehearing
Headnotes of recent judgments
Agenda
Summaries of the cases
Appeals inscribed ‑ Session beginning
Notices to the Profession and Press Release
Deadlines: Motions before the Court
Deadlines: Appeals
Judgments reported in S.C.R. |
855
856 - 859
-
-
860 - 864
-
865 - 869
870
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
871
872
- |
Demandes d'autorisation d'appel déposées
Demandes soumises à la Cour depuis la dernière parution
Audience ordonnée
Audience sur les demandes d'autorisation
Jugements rendus sur les demandes d'autorisation
Jugement sur requête
Requêtes
Avis d'appel déposés depuis la dernière parution
Avis d'intervention déposés depuis la dernière parution
Avis de désistement déposés depuis la dernière parution
Appels entendus depuis la dernière parution et résultat
Jugements rendus sur les appels en délibéré
Nouvelle audition
Sommaires des arrêts récents
Calendrier
Résumés des affaires
Appels inscrits ‑ Session commençant le
Avis aux avocats et communiqué de presse
Délais: Requêtes devant la Cour
Délais: Appels
Jugements publiés au R.C.S. |
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FILED |
|
DEMANDES D'AUTORISATION D'APPEL DÉPOSÉES |
Il Nam Cho
Jacqueline An
v. (28551)
Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)
Michael Kyne
Regional Municipality of Peel
FILING DATE 17.4.2001
Pilot Insurance Company
Claude M. Pensa, Q.C.
Harrison Pensa
v. (28552)
John Christopher Taggard, by his litigation guardian Thomas Tessier et al. (Ont.)
Jerry O’Brien
Paroian, Raphael, Courey, Cohen & Houston
FILING DATE 27.4.2001
Northwood Inc.
Peter G. Voith
Davis & Company
v. (28550)
Forest Practices Board (B.C.)
Mark G. Underhill
Arvay Finlay
FILING DATE 27.4.2001
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE SUBMITTED TO COURT SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
|
DEMANDES SOUMISES À LA COUR DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
MAY 7, 2001 / LE 7 MAI 2001
CORAM: Chief Justice McLachlin and Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ. /
Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache
Ruth A. Laseur
v. (28370)
Workers' Compensation Board of Nova Scotia and Nova Scotia Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal (N.S.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Administrative Tribunals - Authority to apply the Charter - Equality Rights - Workers’ Compensation - Whether the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Tribunal of Nova Scotia has the authority to refuse on Charter grounds to apply benefits provisions of its enabling statute - Whether the chronic pain provisions of the Worker’s Compensation Act, S.N.S. 1994-95, c.10, and the Functional Restoration (Multi-Faceted Pain Services) Program Regulations, N.S. Reg.57/96 infringe the equality rights guaranteed under section 15 (1) of the Charter? - Whether the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal erred in upholding the Nova Scotia Workers’ Compensation Board’s policies which exclude chronic pain as a category of compensable injury?
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
January 31, 2000 Nova Scotia Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal (L.M. Rodwell Hayes, A. Green and M.R. Margolian) |
|
Appeal allowed in part |
|
|
|
November 8, 2000 Nova Scotia Court of Appeal (Freeman, Flinn and Cromwell JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal against decision of the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Tribunal allowed; Applicant’s cross-appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
January 5, 2001 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
Donald Martin
v. (28372)
Workers' Compensation Board of Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal (N.S.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Administrative Tribunals - Authority to apply the Charter - Equality Rights - Workers’ Compensation - Whether the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Tribunal of Nova Scotia has the authority to refuse on Charter grounds to apply benefits provisions of its enabling statute - Whether the chronic pain provisions of the Worker’s Compensation Act, S.N.S. 1994-95, c.10, and the Functional Restoration (Multi-Faceted Pain Services) Program Regulations, N.S. Reg.57/96 infringe the equality rights guaranteed under section 15 (1) of the Charter? - Whether the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal erred in upholding the Nova Scotia Workers’ Compensation Board’s policies which exclude chronic pain as a category of compensable injury?
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
January 31, 2000 Nova Scotia Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal (A.M Boucher, L.M. Rodwell Hayes and A. Hickey) |
|
Appeal allowed; Applicant entitled to temporary earnings replacement benefits from August 6, 1996 to October 15, 1996 and medical aid up to October 15, 1996 |
|
|
|
November 8, 2000 Nova Scotia Court of Appeal (Freeman, Flinn and Cromwell JJ.A.) |
|
Appeals against decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal allowed; Applicant’s cross-appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
January 5, 2001 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
CORAM: L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour and LeBel JJ. /
Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel
Tembec Inc.
v. (28214)
American Home Assurance Company, New Hampshire Insurance Company and Commonwealth Insurance Company (Que.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Commercial law - Insurance - Damages - All-risk insurance policy - Whether the trial judge and the Court of Appeal erred in denying indemnity to the Applicant under the terms of the all-risk insurance policy issued by the Respondents.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
January 31, 1997 Superior Court of Quebec (Décarie J.) |
|
Applicant’s claim seeking compensation under the “Multi-peril-subscription policy” dismissed |
|
|
|
August 29, 2000 Court of Appeal of Québec (Brossard, Rochette and Philippon [ad hoc] JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
October 27, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
Constance Clara Fogal and The Defence of Canadian Liberty Committee /
Le comité de la liberté canadienne
v. (28351)
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Secretary of State, The Minister of External Affairs, The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, The Right Honourable Sergio Marchi, The Right Honourable Jean Chrétien and Other Members of Cabinet (F.C.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Administrative law - Judicial review - Procedural law - Mootness - Respondents’ motion to dismiss Applicants’ application for judicial review for mootness granted - Federal Court of Appeal affirming decision - Whether Court of Appeal erred in creating new class of “non-moot” but “academic” or “hypothetical” constitutional issues which Federal Court had a “discretion” not to hear - Whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding motion judge’s decision that, notwithstanding that some of the issues were not moot, he was nonetheless not going to hear them.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
January 21, 1999
Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division
(Dubé J.)
Applicants’ motion for recusal dismissed
April 22, 1999 Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division (McKeown J.) |
|
Applicants’ application for judicial review dismissed; Respondents’ motion to dismiss application for mootness granted |
|
|
|
June 12, 2000 Federal Court of Appeal (Isaac, Robertson and Sharlow JJ.A.) |
|
Appeals dismissed
|
|
|
|
January 4, 2001 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal and motion to extend time filed |
|
|
|
CORAM: Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /
Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie
Golden Flight Travel Ltd.
v. (28341)
Jowaks Developments Limited, Fredwaks Developments Limited, Robadams Developments Limited, Suzadams Developments Limited, Howadams Developments Limited, Eladams Developments Limited, Franbee Holdings Limited, Carbee Holdings Limited and Michabee Holdings Limited (Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Procedural law - Appeal - Summary judgment - Evidence - Admission of fresh evidence on appeal - Whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing appeal from order for summary judgment and in refusing to admit fresh evidence
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
March 20, 2000 Superior Court of Justice (Nordheimer J.) |
|
Respondents’ motion for summary judgment granted; Applicant’s motion for leave to admit fresh evidence dismissed |
|
|
|
October 19, 2000 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Catzman, Borins and Feldman JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
December 29, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal and to extend time filed |
|
|
|
Chee K. Ling
v. (28315)
Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Taxation - Self-incrimination - Assessment - Income tax audit conducted pursuant to Income Tax Act - Statutorily compelled evidence obtained from audit used against taxpayer - Use and derivative use immunity in a subsequent tax evasion prosecution in which that person’s liberty interest is at stake.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
July 21, 1997
Provincial Court of British Columbia (Voir dire)
(Graham Prov. Ct. J.)
Information found during income tax audit to be admissible
August 7, 1997
Provincial Court of British Columbia
(Graham Prov. Ct. J.)
Applicant convicted of 5 offences under section 239(1)a) of the Income Tax Act, Canada; conditional stay of proceedings entered on a sixth count
June 5, 1998 Supreme Court of British Columbia (Millward J.) |
|
Appeal from conviction allowed and matter remitted for a new trial on all counts |
|
|
|
October 19, 2000 Court of Appeal of British Columbia (McEachern C.J. and Rowles and Hall JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
December 15, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
JUDGMENTS ON APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE |
|
JUGEMENTS RENDUS SUR LES DEMANDES D'AUTORISATION |
MAY 10, 2001 / LE 10 MAI 2001
28373 RICHARD FREEMAN ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (B.C.) (Criminal)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.
The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande d’autorisation de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law (Non Charter) - Sexual assault - Evidence - Credibility - Whether trial judge misapprehended material parts of the evidence which went to her assessment of the credibility of the complainant and the accused - Whether Court of Appeal’s failure to order a new trial in conflict with jurisprudence.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
June 24, 1997 Supreme Court of British Columbia (Dillon J.) |
|
Applicant convicted of three counts of sexual assault contrary to s. 246.1 of the Criminal Code |
|
|
|
March 19, 1999 British Columbia Court of Appeal (McEachern C.J.B.C., Lambert and Esson JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal against conviction on Count 2 dismissed; appeal against conviction on Counts 3 and 4 allowed and acquittal entered |
|
|
|
February 16, 2000 British Columbia Court of Appeal (McEachern C.J.B.C., Lambert and Esson JJ.A.) |
|
Applicant’s application for an order setting aside the March 19, 1999 decision on Count 2, dismissed |
|
|
|
January 24, 2001 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
28392 KYLE BRENDON STROSHEIN ‑ v. ‑ HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Sask.) (Criminal)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, Iacobucci and Bastarache JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Sentencing - Custodial and conditional sentences - Armed robbery involving small amount of cash - Applicant, notwithstanding a previous conviction, given conditional sentence involving monitored house arrest, curfew and community service - Co-accused in separate proceedings given custodial sentence - Whether court of Appeal should have replaced conditional sentence with custodial sentence without considering all the provisions articulated in s. 742.1 of the Criminal Code - Whether conditional sentence demonstrably unfit when it was equivalent to the term of incarceration substituted.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
May 15, 2000 Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Kolenick J.) |
|
Applicant sentenced to a 18-month conditional sentence with 6 months of electronic monitoring |
|
|
|
February 9, 2001 Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan (Tallis, Vancise [dissenting] and Jackson JJ.A.) |
|
Respondent’s appeal against sentence allowed; sentence set aside; imposition of a 10-month sentence |
|
|
|
February 28, 2001 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
28278 DIANE BOUCHER ‑ v. ‑ GASTON DOIRON ET ROGER DOIRON (N.B.) (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
Civil Procedure - Procedural Law - Evidence - Whether findings at trial were based upon credibility - Whether interjections of trial judge caused unfairness.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
November 18, 1999 Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick (Creaghan, J.) |
|
Damages of $298,906 awarded to applicant for personal injuries in motor vehicle accident |
|
|
|
October 5, 2000 Court of Appeal of New Brunswick (Ryan, Turnbull and Drapeau, JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal allowed in part, damages for past loss of housekeeping increased; Cross-appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
November 30, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
28355 SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE ‑ c. ‑ DANIEL BRUNETTE (Qué.) (Criminelle)
CORAM: Le Juge en chef et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache
La demande d’autorisation d’appel est rejetée.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit Criminel - Détermination de la peine - Emprisonnement avec sursis - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en droit en substituant une peine d’emprisonnement avec sursis à une peine d’emprisonnement continu alors que celle-ci, malgré qu’une erreur de droit aurait été commise, n’était pas manifestement déraisonnable? - Subsidiairement, dans un cas où le premier juge omet lors de l’imposition de la peine de prendre en compte l’emprisonnement avec sursis prévu par l’art. 742.1 du Code criminel, L.R.C. 1985, ch. C-46, la Cour d’appel doit-elle lui retourner le dossier afin que l’examen de cette peine soit effectué selon les principes prescrits à l’article 718 du Code criminel et conformément à ceux émis par cette Cour dans les arrêts R. c. Proulx, [2000] 1 R.C.S. 61, R. c. R.A.R., [2000] 1 R.C.S. 163 et R.c. R.N.S., [2000] 1 R.C.S. 149?
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 8 mai 1998 Cour du Québec (Chambre criminelle et pénale) (Cadieux j.c.q.) |
|
Intimé condamné à 18 mois d’emprisonnement pour agression sexuelle |
|
|
|
Le 17 novembre 2000 Cour d'appel du Québec (Beauregard, Proulx et Pelletier jj.c.a.) |
|
Appel accueilli; ordonnance que la peine de 18 mois d’emprisonnement soit purgée dans la collectivité |
|
|
|
Le 15 janvier 2001
Cour suprême du Canada
Demande d’autorisation d’appel déposée
28301 ANDRZEJ MACIOROWSKI ‑ v. ‑ LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY (Ont.) (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
Commercial law - Insurance - Insurer’s duty to defend - Tort action against insured - Alleged breach of statutory condition - Insurer denying liability and added to action as statutory third party - Insured seeking costs of independent defence from insurer - Whether issue of insurer’s duty to defend an insured, in a case where the insurer alleges a breach of condition, is to be determined on a case-by-case basis - Whether Nichols v. American Home Assurance , [1990] 1 S.C.R. 801, should have been applied - Alternatively, whether there were clear and uncontested breaches of condition - Alternatively, whether the matter should have been remanded to motions judge for determination, on a full hearing of all the evidence and case law.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
November 16, 1999 Superior Court of Justice (Kiteley J.) |
|
Applicant’s motion for order compelling Respondent to provide and pay for defence of action dismissed |
|
|
|
October 3, 2000 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Catzman, Abella and Rosenberg JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
December 4, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
28326 WAWANESA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY ‑ v. ‑ BRENT SHEPHERD AND BARBARA WEIR SHEPHERD (Alta.) (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
Commercial law - Insurance - Exclusions - Notice - Court of Appeal finding that insurer was in breach of s. 203(1) of Insurance Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. I-5, and therefore could not rely on exclusions in policy - Whether purpose of s. 203(1) is to impose a duty on an insurer to provide real and actual notice of policy exclusions to an insured, so as to protect that insured from suffering real prejudice by virtue of being uninformed.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
December 17, 1998 Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Belzil J.C.Q.B.A.) |
|
Action against the Applicant dismissed |
|
|
|
October 23, 2000 Court of Appeal of Alberta (McFadyen, Picard and Costigan JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal allowed |
|
|
|
December 22, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
28319 RAVI DEVGAN ‑ v. ‑ NASIM JIWANI AND RAJABLI JIWANI (Ont.) (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
Commercial law - Bankruptcy - Applicant defaulted on debt - Respondents obtained civil judgment - Applicant declared bankruptcy - Applicant convicted of fraud in relation to debt and ordered to make compensation under (former) s. 725(1) of the Criminal Code - Declaration made that civil judgment survives bankruptcy - Whether there was excessive delay in bringing an application before the Bankruptcy Court - Whether a criminal compensation order and a civil judgment can be made in respect of the same debt.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
February 26, 2000 Superior Court of Justice (Farley J.) |
|
Declaration that the Applicant’s discharge from bankruptcy did not release the debt owed to Respondents |
|
|
|
October 20, 2000 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Catzman, Charron and MacPherson JJ.A.) |
|
Appeal dismissed |
|
|
|
December 18, 2000 Supreme Court of Canada |
|
Application for leave to appeal filed |
|
|
|
MOTIONS |
|
REQUÊTES
|
30.4.2001
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum of the intervener the Attorney General of Newfoundland
Her Majesty the Queen
v. (27717)
Ford Ward (Nfld.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le mémoire de l’intervenant le Procureur général de Terre-Neuve
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to April 20, 2001.
30.4.2001
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the appellant’s factum, record and book of authorities
Robert Martin Friedland
v. (27773)
United States of America, et al. (Ont.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les dossier, mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’appelant
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to August 31, 2001.
1.5.2001
Before / Devant: IACOBUCCI J.
Further order on motion for leave to intervene
BY/PAR: La Procureure générale du Québec
Canadian Judges Conference
IN/DANS: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick as represented by The Minister of Finance, et al.
v. (27722)
Ian P. Mackin, et al. (N.B.)
Autre ordonnance sur une requête en autorisation d'intervention
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
UPON APPLICATION by the Attorney General of Québec and the Canadian Judges Conference / Conférence canadienne des juges for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the orders of February 9, 2001 and March 7, 2001;
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said interveners are granted permission to present oral argument at the hearing of the appeal not to exceed the time allowed respectively to each of them as follows:
- Attorney General of Québec 10 minutes
- Canadian Judges Conference 10 minutes
À LA SUITE D’UNE DEMANDE de la Procureure générale du Québec et la Conférence canadienne des juges / Canadian Judges Conference visant à obtenir l’autorisation d’intervenir dans l’appel susmentionné et suite aux ordonnances du 9 février 2001 et 7 mars 2001;
IL EST EN OUTRE ORDONNÉ que les plaidoiries des intervenants soient respectivement limitées de la façon suivante:
- Procureure générale du Québec 10 minutes
- Conférence canadienne des juges 10 minutes
1.5.2001
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time to serve and file a notice of intention to intervene
BY/PAR: Attorney General of Saskatchewan
IN/DANS: Chief Councillor Mathew Hill, also known as Tha-Iathatk, on his own behalf and on behalf of all other members of the Kitkatla Band, et al.
v. (27801)
The Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture, et al. (B.C.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer un avis d’intention d’intervenir
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to April 17, 2001, nunc pro tunc.
1.5.2001
Before / Devant: GONTHIER J.
Miscellaneous motion
Sa Majesté la Reine
c. (27581)
Neil Peters (Crim.)(Qué.)
Autre requête
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
La requête de la part de l’intimé Neil Peters pour signifier et déposer le “mémoire des intimés mémoire d’appel incident (règle 29(3) de la Cour suprême)” et le “respondent’s factum” dans leur état actuel est accordée sous réserve du jugement rendu ce jour dans le dossier 27579.
1.5.2001
Before / Devant: GONTHIER J.
Motion by the appellant to strike out
Sa Majesté la Reine
c. (27579)
Roger Craig Denton (Crim.)(Qué.)
and
Sa Majesté la Reine
c. (27581)
Neil Peters (Crim.)(Qué.)
Requête en radiation de la part de l’appelante
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
Vu l’art. 29(3) des règles de la Cour suprême du Canada, la requête est accordée, ordre est donné de radier les par. 167 à 174 du mémoire de l’intimé Denton, sauf à se pourvoir.
1.5.2001
Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum and book of authorities of the intervener the Attorney General of Saskatchewan
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick as represented by The Minister of Finance, et al.
v. (27722)
Ian P. Mackin, et al. (N.B.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer les mémoire et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intervenant le Procureur général de la Saskatchewan
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to April 19, 2001, nunc pro tunc.
2.5.2001
Before / Devant: MAJOR J.
Motions to strike out
Manickavasagam Suresh
v. (27790)
The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, et al. (F.C.)
Requêtes en radiation
GRANTED IN PART / ACCORDÉE EN PARTIE
The respondents’ motion to strike subparagraphs 14(v) and 14(vi) of the factum of the intervener, the Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils is granted in part. Only subparagraph 14(v) is struck from the factum.
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
The respondents’ motion to strike paragraphs 40, 42 and 44 of the factum and tabs 44 and 47 of the book of authorities of the intervener, the Canadian Council for Refugees is granted.
3.5.2001
Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum of the intervener the Attorney General of Alberta
Chief Councillor Mathew Hill, also known as Tha-Iathatk, on his own behalf and on behalf of all other members of the Kitkatla Band, et al.
v. (27801)
The Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture, et al. (B.C.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le mémoire de l’intervenant le Procureur général de l’Alberta
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to June 12, 2001.
3.5.2001
Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to file the respondent’s factum, record and book of authorities
Ka Lam Law, et al.
c. (27870)
Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(N.-B.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour déposer les mémoire, dossier et recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intimée
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Délai prorogé au 15 juin 2001.
3.5.2001
Before / Devant: THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file a response to the application for leave
Richard Freeman
v. (28373)
Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)
Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer une réponse à la demande en autorisation
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to March 12, 2001.
NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED SINCE LAST ISSUE |
|
AVIS D’APPEL DÉPOSÉS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
9.4.2001
Howard Burke
v. (28546)
Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)
AS OF RIGHT
19.4.2001
Michael Derrick Robicheau
v. (28545)
Her Majesty the Queen (N.S.)
AS OF RIGHT
30.4.2001
Hughes Communications Inc.
v. (28070)
Spar Aerospace Limited, et al. (Que.)
DEADLINES: MOTIONS
|
|
DÉLAIS: REQUÊTES
|
BEFORE THE COURT:
Pursuant to Rule 23.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada, the following deadlines must be met before a motion before the Court can be heard: |
|
DEVANT LA COUR:
Conformément à l'article 23.1 des Règles de la Cour suprême du Canada, les délais suivants doivent être respectés pour qu'une requête soit entendue par la Cour :
|
Motion day : May 14, 2001
Service : April 23, 2001 Filing : April 27, 2001 Respondent : May 4, 2001
Motion day : June 11, 2001
Service : May 18, 2001 Filing : May 25, 2001 Respondent : June 1, 2001 |
|
Audience du : 14 mai 2001
Signification : 23 avril 2001 Dépôt : 27 avril 2001 Intimé : 4 mai 2001
Audience du : 11 juin 2001
Signification : 18 mai 2001 Dépôt : 25 mai 2001 Intimé : 1 juin 2001 |
DEADLINES: APPEALS
|
|
DÉLAIS: APPELS |
The Fall Session of the Supreme Court of Canada will commence October 1, 2001.
Pursuant to the Supreme Court Act and Rules, the following requirements for filing must be complied with before an appeal can be inscribed for hearing:
Appellant’s record; appellant’s factum; and appellant’s book(s) of authorities must be filed within four months of the filing of the notice of appeal.
Respondent’s record (if any); respondent’s factum; and respondent’s book(s) of authorities must be filed within eight weeks of the date of service of the appellant's factum.
Intervener's factum and intervener’s book(s) of authorities, if any, must be filed within four weeks of the date of service of the respondent's factum, unless otherwise ordered.
Parties’ condensed book, if required, must be filed on or before the day of hearing of the appeal.
Please consult the Notice to the Profession of October 1997 for further information.
The Registrar shall inscribe the appeal for hearing upon the filing of the respondent's factum or after the expiry of the time for filing the respondent's factum.
|
|
La session d’automne de la Cour suprême du Canada commencera le 1er octobre 2001.
Conformément à la Loi sur la Cour suprême et aux Règles, il faut se conformer aux exigences suivantes avant qu'un appel puisse être inscrit pour audition:
Le dossier de l’appelant, son mémoire et son recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine doivent être déposés dans les quatre mois du dépôt de l’avis d’appel.
Le dossier de l’intimé (le cas échéant), son mémoire et son recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine doivent être déposés dans les huit semaines suivant la signification du mémoire de l’appelant.
Le mémoire de l'intervenant et son recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine, le cas échéant, doivent être déposés dans les quatre semaines suivant la signification du mémoire de l'intimé, sauf ordonnance contraire.
Le recueil condensé des parties, le cas échéant, doivent être déposés au plus tard le jour de l’audition de l’appel.
Veuillez consulter l’avis aux avocats du mois d’octobre 1997 pour plus de renseignements.
Le registraire inscrit l'appel pour audition après le dépôt du mémoire de l'intimé ou à l'expiration du délai pour le dépôt du mémoire de l'intimé. |
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE
CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME
2000
OCTOBER - OCTOBRE |
|
NOVEMBER - NOVEMBRE |
|
DECEMBER - DECEMBRE |
||||||||||||||||||
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
1 |
M 2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
8 |
H 9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
|
5 |
M 6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
|
3 |
M 4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
|
12 |
H 13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
|
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
|
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
|
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
27
|
28 |
29 |
30 |
|
|
|
24 |
H 25 |
H 26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
- 2001 -
JANUARY - JANVIER |
|
FEBRUARY - FÉVRIER |
|
MARCH - MARS |
||||||||||||||||||
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
H 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
|
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
|
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
14 |
M 15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
|
11 |
M 12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
|
11 |
M 12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
|
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
|
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
|
|
|
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
|
|
|
|
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
APRIL - AVRIL |
|
MAY - MAI |
|
JUNE - JUIN |
||||||||||||||||||
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
|
S D |
M L |
T M |
W M |
T J |
F V |
S S |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
R 4 |
R 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
H 13 |
14 |
|
R 6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
|
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
15 |
H 16 |
M 17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
|
13 |
M 14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
|
10 |
M 11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
|
20 |
H 21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
|
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
29 |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
|
|
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sittings of the court: Séances de la cour: |
|
18 sitting weeks / semaines séances de la cour 78 sitting days / journées séances de la cour 9 motion and conference days / journées requêtes, conférences 3 holidays during sitting days / jours fériés durant les sessions
|
Motions: Requêtes: |
M |
|
Holidays: Jours fériés: |
H |