Bulletins

OF CANADA                                            DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

April 12, 2001  679 - 703                                                                      le 12 avril 2001

CONTENTS                                                   TABLE DES MATIÈRES

3088-7459 Québec Inc., et al.

José James O’Reilly

c. (28451)

Antonio Pereira (Qué.)

Martine Riendeau

Stein & Stein

DATE DE PRODUCTION 9.3.2001

Gordon Wayne Paris

David E. Harris

v. (28455)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Michal Fairburn

A.G. for Ontario

FILING DATE 13.3.2001

Jeanette Dechant

Jeanette Dechant

v. (28292)

Zahra Coulter, et al. (Alta.)

Pat Peacock

Peacock, Linder & Halt

FILING DATE 15.3.2001

Provigo Distribution Inc., et al.

Louise Boutin

Pâquet, Galardo & Nantais

c. (28460)

Ville de St-Léonard, et al. (Qué.)

Steve Cadrin

Bouchart-d’Orval Cadrin   

DATE DE PRODUCTION 16.3.2001

Abdur Rashid Khan

Peter Leask, Q.C.

Leask Bahen

v. (28466)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

John Gordon

A.G. of British Columbia

FILING DATE 16.3.2001

Joseph Alan Sidorov

Douglas D. Merchant

Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP

v. (28461)

Her Majesty the Queen (Alta.)

Eric Tolppanen

A.G. of Alberta

FILING DATE 16.3.2001

The Corporation of the City of Ottawa

Jerald Bellomo

The Corporation of the City of Ottawa

v. (28469)

Ken Goudie, et al. (Ont.)

Emilio S. Binavince

Binavince Smith

FILING DATE 19.3.2001

Patricia B. MacCulloch

Patricia B. MacCulloch

v. (28463)

Stewart McInnes & McInnes Cooper & Robertson a registered partnership (N.S.)

John Merrick, Q.C.

Merrick Holm

FILING DATE 19.3.2001

Gilles Boies

Martin Tremblay

c. (28468)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qué.)

Céline Cyr

Procureur général du Québec

DATE DE PRODUCTION 19.3.2001

John Guy Bradford

Marie Henein

Greenspan, Henein and White

v. (28474)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Laura Hodgson

A.G. of Ontario

FILING DATE 20.3.2001

Ecu-Line N.V.

H. Peter Swanson

Campney & Murphy

v. (28472)

Z.I. Pompey Industrie, et al. (F.C.)

George Pollack

Sproule, Pollack

FILING DATE 23.3.2001

Fernand Ethier

Fernand Ethier

c. (28473)

Marie Duchesne Tremblay (Qué.)

Sylvie Breton

Pelletier, Breton

DATE DE PRODUCTION 26.3.2001

Gilberte Dupuis

Élaine Bissonnette, c.r.

c. (28471)

Jean Themens (Qué.)

Josée Dussault

DATE DE PRODUCTION 29.3.2001

Syndicat des chauffeurs de la Société de transport de la Ville de Laval (CSN)

Mario Évangéliste

Sauvé et Roy

c. (28475)

Gilles Ferland, en sa qualité d’arbitre de griefs (Qué.)

Gilles Ferland

DATE DE PRODUCTION 30.3.2001

Alberta & N.W.T. (District of MacKenzie) Building and Construction Trades Council on behalf of its affiliated local unions

Robert R. Blakely

Blakely & Dushenski

v. (28476)

Ledcor Industries Ltd., et al. (Alta.)

David J. Ross, Q.C.

McLennan Ross

FILING DATE 30.3.2001

The Chippewas of Sarnia Band

Earl A. Cherniak, Q.C.

Lerner & Associates

v. (28365)

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

Charlotte Bell, Q.C.

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE 30.3.2001

APRIL 9, 2001 / LE 9 AVRIL 2001

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

Le juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Iacobucci et Bastarache

Richard Freeman

v. (28373)

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

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

Kyle Brendon Stroshein

v. (28392)

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

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

The Commissioner of Patents

v. (28155)

The President and Fellows of Harvard College (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property Law - Patentability of complex life forms - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that claims 1 to 12 in the patent application at issue amount to a “composition of matter” within the meaning of the term “invention” as defined in section 2 of the Patent Act - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that claims 1 to 12 amount to an “invention” under s. 2 of the Patent Act - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that the Respondent is entitled to a patent for the entire “non-human mammal” described in claims 1 to 12, even though the presence of an oncogene is the only aspect of the animal for which the Respondent is responsible - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that the applicable standard of review was not satisfied in this case.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (28273)

Thomas Allen and Edward Milewski (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the test of “reasonable expectation of profit” as it applies in the context of partnership is to be applied at the partner level or the partnership level - Whether financing charges incurred by a partner are to be considered in determining whether that individual partner has a source of income - Section 20(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985 (5 ^th  Supp.) c. 1 .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Diane Boucher

v. (28278)

Gaston Doiron, Roger Doiron (N.B.)

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

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

Les juges L’Heureux-Dubé, Arbour et LeBel

Michel Blondin

c. (28366)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Preuve - Possession de pornographie infantile - Immoralité sexuelle là où demeure un enfant - Agression sexuelle - Infractions commises par un médecin dans le cadre d’une relation médecin-patient - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en refusant de remettre l’audition de la cause et de considérer la question de la constitutionnalité de l’article 163.1(4) a) du Code criminel  nonobstant une demande  à cet effet - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en refusant de conclure que le témoignage d’un expert était nécessaire pour démontrer qu’un préjudice avait été subi par un enfant de 30 mois concernant l’article 172(1) du Code - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en refusant de suivre les principes établis dans l’arrêt R. c. W.(D.) déclarant que ceux-ci n’étaient pas sacro-saints.

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Claude Maheu

c. (28283)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Procédure pénale - Amendement de l’acte d’accusation - Preuve pénale - Déclarations antérieures incompatibles - Admissibilité - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en accueillant seulement en partie l’appel du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Aimé Vachon

c. (28098)

Commission des lésions professionnelles et Denys Beaulieu (Qué.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail – Accident de travail – Base de calcul de l’indemnité de remplacement du revenu – Le travailleur étant un Indien inscrit, doit-on exclure l’impôt fédéral et provincial de la base de calcul? – Révision judiciaire d’une décision de la Commission d’appel en matière de lésions professionnelles – Disposition privative – Loi sur les accidents de travail et les maladies professionnelles, L.R.Q., c. A-3.001, art. 45, 62, 63, 67, 144 et 429.59 – Impôt sur le revenu – Exemption fiscale pour les Indiens inscrits vivant et travaillant sur le territoire d’une réserve – Loi sur les Indiens, L.R.C., c. I-5, art. 87 et 88 – Charte canadienne des droits et libertés , art. 15  – Égalité devant la loi – La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en rejetant l’appel du demandeur?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Raymond Piché

c. (28107)

Sa Majesté la Reine telle que représentée par le Conseil du Trésor

ET ENTRE :

Joanne Granger

c.

Sa Majesté la Reine telle que représentée par le Conseil du Trésor

ET ENTRE :

Geneviève Cousineau

c.

Sa Majesté la Reine telle que représentée par le Conseil du Trésor

ET ENTRE :

Sylvie Boileau Di Palma

c.

Sa Majesté la Reine telle que représentée par le Conseil du Trésor

ET ENTRE :

Max Weder

c.

                                        Sa Majesté la Reine telle que représentée par le Conseil du Trésor (C.F.)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Arbitrage - Contrôle judiciaire - Législation - Interprétation - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en concluant que le régime des avocats non syndiqués de la fonction publique fédérale était d’application essentiellement discrétionnaire tant de la part du Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor que des administrateurs généraux des ministères et autres organismes de la fonction publique fédérale où ces derniers travaillent? - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en concluant que la suspension de ce régime de rémunération ne constituait pas une modification de ce régime et partant, n’était pas interdite par la Loi sur les restrictions salariales dans le secteur public? - La Cour d’appel fédérale  a-t-elle erré en interprétant ce régime de rémunération de façon restrictive sans tenir compte de son objectif et de son économie et du fait que les requérants ont reçu de leur employeur des cotes de rendement qui auraient dû leur donner droit à des augmentations au mérite ou à des primes de rendement? - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en interprétant ce régime de rémunération sans tenir compte adéquatement du contexte des mots qui le composent et de l’intention du Conseil du Trésor qui l’a édicté pour le bénéfice de ses employés? - La Cour d’appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en interprétant ce régime de rémunération sans tenir compte des principes que cette Cour a édictés dans l’arrêt Wells c. Terre-Neuve, [1999] 3 R.C.S. 1999, dans l’arrêt Wallace c. United Grain Growers Ltd. (Public Press), [1997] 3 R.C.S. 701, et dans l’arrêt Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re), [1998] 1 R.C.S. 27?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

Howard LeLacheur

v. (28181)

Flora Burt, Shelly Dawn Seward (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Limitation Period - Whether the discoverability rule applies to the one-year limitation period under the Nova Scotia Fatal Injuries Act and its companion statues across Canada - Fatal Injuries Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 163

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

CORAM:   Gonthier, Major and Binnie JJ. /

Les juges Gonthier, Major et Binnie

James Thomas Eakin

v. (28288)

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

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Right to counsel - Whether the Applicant was provided with his right to counsel of choice - Whether the Applicant was adequately informed of the offence - Search and seizure - Whether the Applicant provided an adequate waiver of his right when police requested a blood sample - Evidence - Identification evidence - Whether the identification evidence was reliable - DNA evidence - Whether the DNA evidence was of sufficient probative value to be relied upon by the trial judge - Sentencing - Dangerous offender - Whether the dangerous offender designation is to be applied only to habitual criminals - Whether the Applicant’s failure to accept responsibility should have been considered as a factor in declaring the Applicant a dangerous offender

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Bombardier Inc. and Bombardier Services Group

v. (28414)

Public Service Alliance of Canada and Frontec Corporation (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative Law -  Judicial review -  Labour Law - Collective Agreement and Successor Rights provisions within the Canada Labour Code upon privatization - The Canada Industrial Relations Board’s decision confirmed PSAC as the successor bargaining agent for the employees performing work for the Applicant but issued certification orders containing a terminal date  The Federal Court of Appeal concluded that the Board’s decision was made without jurisdiction as its certification orders should not have contained express expiry dates and was otherwise patently unreasonable - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in its determination of the collective bargaining obligations, pursuant to section 47 and 47.1 of the Canada Labour Code, inherited by an employer who takes over work formerly performed by the Government of Canada - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in characterizing the Board’s decision as being outside its jurisdiction - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal applied the required standard of review. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Attorney General of Canada

v. (28304)

Paul Juliar, Karen Juliar and Juliar Holdings Ltd. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Rectification - Taxation - Income tax - Trial judge permitting rectification of corporate transaction so as to avoid liability for immediate payment of income tax - Court of Appeal affirming decision - Whether Court of Appeal erred in extending principles of rectification by permitting agreement to be rewritten not because agreement incorrectly set down terms of contract, but because consequences of arrangement were undesirable.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Greenforco Holding Corporation

v. (28297)

Yonge‐Merton Developments Limited (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Real Estate - Agreements of purchase and sale - Approval periods - Agreement of purchase and sale grants purchaser a thirty day approval period - Vendor alleges oral agreement amended written terms of agreement after execution - Vendor refuses to close according to written terms and purchaser refuses to close according to alleged amendment - What legal results should occur from actions of a purchaser during an approval period - Whether a purchaser should be fixed with knowledge of matters that come to the purchaser’s attention during approval period.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Fellowes, McNeil

v. (28199)

Kansa General International Insurance Company Ltd. and Kansa Canadian Management

Services Inc. (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Solicitor’s negligence - Defence counsel’s failure to alert insurer of possible coverage issue - Whether defence counsel retained by insurer is obliged to advise insurer of potential coverage issue where counsel has a contractual duty to defend but is not yet on the record for the insured -   - Partnership - Contracts - Whether failure by lawyer signing application for insurance to disclose potential claim for professional liability extinguishes coverage for all partners and exposes them to personal liability - Procedural law - Evidence - Whether legal experts can give opinion evidence on duty owed by lawyer to client and whether insurer is obliged to defend and indemnify insured

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Axa Boreal Assurances

v. (28238)

The Co‐Operators Insurance Company (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Insurance - Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule - Named insured - Interpretation to be given ss. 268(5) and (5.2) of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8 - Interpretation and application to be given s. 91(4) of Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule for Accidents after December 31, 1993 and before November 1, 1996, O. Reg. 776/93.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28.3.2001

Before / Devant:  THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Motion to state a constitutional question

Ralph Dick, et al.

v. (27641)

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

Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Notices of intervention are to be filed on or before May 4, 2001.

1.             Can the British Columbia Statute of Limitations, R.S.B.C. 1936, and subsequent enactments and amendments and the British Columbia Limitation Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, together with the Federal Court Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7 , particularly s. 39, constitutionally apply to extinguish any right and title of an Indian Band to the Campbell River and Quinsam Indian Reserves in British Columbia, or any right to compensation in lieu of such right or title?

2.             Can British Columbia Order in Council No. 1036, dated July 28, 1938, constitutionally apply to alter any pre-existing Band entitlement to the Campbell River and Quinsam Indian Reserves in British Columbia?

1.             La Statute of Limitations de la Colombie-Britannique, R.S.B.C. 1936, et ses versions et modifications subséquentes et la Limitation Act de la Colombie-Britannique, R.S.B.C. 1979, interprétées conjointement avec la Loi sur la Cour fédérale , L.R.C. 1985, ch. F-7 , en particulier l’art. 39, peuvent-elles, selon la Constitution, s’appliquer de façon à éteindre des droits et titres que détient une bande indienne sur les réserves indiennes de Campbell River et de Quinsam en Colombie-Britannique ou le droit à une indemnisation à la place de ces droits ou titres?

2.             Le décret 1036 du 28 juillet 1938 de la Colombie-Britannique peut-il, selon la Constitution, s’appliquer de façon à modifier tout droit préexistant d’une bande sur les réserves indiennes de Campbell River et de Quinsam en Colombie-Britannique?

2.4.2001

Before / Devant:  ARBOUR J.

Motion for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Attorney General of Ontario

IN/DANS:              The Vancouver Sun

v. (28190)

Her Majesty the Queen, et al. (Crim.)(B.C.)

Requête en autorisation d'intervention

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the Attorney General of Ontario for leave to intervene in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed ;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion  for leave to intervene of the applicant Attorney General of Ontario is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The request to present oral argument is deferred to a date following receipt and consideration of the written arguments of the parties and the interveners.

The intervener shall not be entitled to adduce further evidence or otherwise to supplement the record of the parties.

Pursuant to Rule 18(6) the intervener shall pay to the appellant and respondents any additional disbursements occasioned to the appellant and respondents by the intervention.

3.4.2001

Before / Devant:  BINNIE J.

Miscellaneous motion

La Procureure générale du Québec

c. (28417)

Laurent Laroche, et al. (Qué.)

Autre requête

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

La requête en annulation du sursis accordé par M. le juge Deblois, le 6 mars 2001, est rejetée.

Compte tenu de la nature interlocutoire des présentes procédures, il est toutefois ordonné que, dès que la demande d’autorisation aura été déposée le 9 avril 2001 ou avant cette date, et que toute réponse ou réplique des parties aura été déposée dans le délai habituel prescrit par les règles, l’examen de la demande d’autorisation par notre Cour soit fait rapidement.

The application to set aside the stay granted by Mr. Justice Deblois on March 6, 2001, is dismissed.

In light of the interlocutory nature of these proceedings, however it is ordered that once the leave application is filed on or before April 9, 2001, and any response or reply by the parties filed as required within the usual times permitted under the rules, consideration of the leave application by the Court be and the same is hereby expedited.

3.4.2001

Before / Devant:  THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the response of the respondent Canadian Airlines Corporation

Resurgence Asset Management LLC

v. (28388)

Canadian Airlines Corporation, et al (Alta.)

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

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to March 23, 2001.

3.4.2001

Before / Devant:  ARBOUR J.

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

René Pearson

c. (28427)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt d’une demande d'autorisation

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Délai prorogé au 15 février 2001.

3.4.2001

Before / Devant:  IACOBUCCI J.

Motion for extension of time and leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Canadian Association of Provincial Judges

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.)

Requête visant à obtenir une prorogation de délai et l’autorisation d'intervenir

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the Canadian Association of Provincial Court Judges  for an extension of time and for leave to intervene in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed ;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion for an extension of time and for leave to intervene of the applicant Canadian Association of Provincial Judges  is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a  factum not to exceed 20 pages in length to be served and filed on or before April 27, 2001.

The request to present oral argument is deferred to a date following receipt and consideration of the written arguments of the parties and the interveners.

The intervener shall not be entitled to adduce further evidence or otherwise to supplement the record  of the parties.

Pursuant to Rule 18(6) the intervener shall pay to the appellant and respondents any additional disbursements occasioned to the appellant and respondents by the intervention.

4.4.2001

Before / Devant:  BINNIE J.

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

Nick Bozza, et al.

v. (28364)

Quik-Commissions Inc. (Ont.)

Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de dépôt d’une demande d'autorisation

DISMISSED / REJETÉE

This is an application for an extension of time within which to file an application for leave to appeal.  On May 3rd, 2000 summary judgment was granted in this matter in favour of the Respondent Quik-Commissions Inc. by judgment in which the motions' judge stated:

“The behaviour of the defendant [i.e. the present applicant] throughout this litigation has been to delay, to avoid, to obfuscate... I consider it to be an affront to the administration of Justice if this matter was allowed to proceed beyond this point.”

An appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed on November 28, 2000.  We are now approaching the 1st anniversary of the Trial Judgment.

The applicants have not filed any material that would suggest that there is any merit in the proposed leave application.  There is nothing before me, therefore, that would justify prolonging this action.  The application for an extension of time is therefore dismissed.

4.4.2001

Before / Devant:  THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the book of authorities of the intervener Canadian Council of Churches

Manickavasagam Suresh

v. (27790)

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, et al. (F.C.)

Requête en prorogation du délai imparti pour signifier et déposer le recueil de jurisprudence et de doctrine de l’intimé Conseil canadien des églises

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Time extended to March 22, 2001.

4.4.2001

Before / Devant:  ARBOUR J.

Motions for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Attorney General of Canada

Attorney General of Ontario

IN/DANS:              The Honourable Ralph Klein, et al.

v. (27980)

Barbara Decock, Tara Leigh Decock, an infant by her Next Friend, Barbara Decock, and Lindsey Allison Decock, et al. (Alta.)

Requêtes en autorisation d'intervention

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the Attorney General of Canada and the Attorney General of Ontario for leave to intervene in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed ;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1.             The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant Attorney General of Canada is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a  factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

2.             The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant Attorney General of Ontario is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The request to present oral argument is deferred to a date following receipt and consideration of the written arguments of the parties and the interveners.

The interveners shall not be entitled to adduce further evidence or otherwise to supplement the record  of the parties.

Pursuant to Rule 18(6) the interveners shall pay to the appellants and respondents any additional disbursements occasioned to the appellants and respondents by the interventions.

5.4.2001

Before / Devant:  GONTHIER J.

Further order on motion for leave to intervene

BY/PAR:                Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils

Canadian Council of Churches

Canadian Arab Federation

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Amnesty International (Canadian Section)

Canadian Council for Refugees

Centre for Constitutional Rights

Canadian Bar Association

IN/DANS:              Manickavasagam Suresh

v. (27790)

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, et al. (F.C.)

Autre ordonnance sur une requête en autorisation d'intervention

UPON APPLICATION by the Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils, the Canadian Council of Churches, the Canadian Arab Federation, the United Nations High Commissioner, the Amnesty International (Canadian Section), the Canadian Council for Refugees, the Centre for Constitutional Rights and the Canadian Bar Association for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the orders of December 18, 2000 and January 23, 2001 thereon;

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:

-               Canadian Arab Federation                                                 10 minutes

-               United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees          10 minutes

-               Canadian Council for Refugees                                         10 minutes

-               Canadian Bar Association                                                  10 minutes

9.4.2001

Before / Devant:  THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Motion by the respondent to state a constitutional question

Sa Majesté la Reine du chef de la Province du Nouveau-Brunswick représenté par le Bureau du Conseil exécutif, et al.

c. (28206)

Le juge Jocelyne Moreau-Bérubé (N.-B.)

Requête de la part de l’intimée pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE    Notices of intervention are to be filed on or before May 15, 2001.

L’article 6.11(8) de la Loi sur la Cour provinciale, L.R.N.-B. 1973, ch. P-21, est-il invalide ou inopérant dans la mesure où la destitution d’un juge de la Cour provinciale sans adresse législative enfreint les principes fondamentaux de l’indépendance judiciaire garantis par le Préambule de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867 ?

Is s. 6.11(8) of the Provincial Court Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. P-21, invalid or of no force or effect insofar as the removal of a judge of the Provincial Court without a legislative address infringes the fundamental principles of judicial independence guaranteed by the Preamble to the Constitution Act, 1867 ?

30.3.2001

Before / Devant:  BINNIE J.

Motion for directions

2001 SCC 22

Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc.

v. (28406)

National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers’ Union of Canada (CAW - Canada), et al. (Sask.)

Demande pour obtenir des directives

2001 CSC 22

The Attorney General of Saskatchewan seeks an order directing the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority to serve the Attorney General of Saskatchewan with the application for leave to appeal in this matter.  Rule 23(10) provides that

an applicant shall serve the application for leave on the parties in the courts below and shall file the application for leave with the Registrar within the time set out in para. 58 (1) (a) sub.-sec.58 (2) of the Act or as extended pursuant to sub-section 59 (1) of the Act. [emphasis added]

Rule 1 defines a party to include “an intervener unless the text provides otherwise or unless the context does not so permit”.  Section 8 of the Constitutional Questions Act R.S.S.  1978 c. - 29 provides in sub-s. 9 that where the Attorney General for Saskatchewan appears in a proceeding before a court in Saskatchewan in respect to a Constitutional Question “he is a party for the purposes of appeal from an adjudication therein respecting the validity or applicability of a law or respecting entitlement to a remedy”.

There is no doubt that the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. was required to serve the Attorney General of Saskatchewan with the leave application to this court.  Accordingly an order will go directing the applicant Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. to serve the Attorney General for Saskatchewan with the application for leave to appeal and any other materials that the applicant may subsequently file in this matter, and permitting the Attorney General for Saskatchewan to file his response within thirty days from the date of such service.

The Attorney General of Saskatchewan is entitled to his costs of this motion in any event of the cause.

[Traduction]

Le procureur général de la Saskatchewan sollicite une ordonnance intimant à la Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. de lui signifier la demande d’autorisation d’appel dans le présent dossier.  La règle 23(10) précise que

[l]a demande d’autorisation doit être signifiée aux parties au litige devant le tribunal de juridiction inférieure et déposée auprès du registraire dans le délai prévu à l’alinéa 58(1)a) et au paragraphe 58(2) de la Loi ou prorogé conformément au paragraphe 59(1) de la Loi. [Je souligne.]

Aux termes de la règle 1, «sauf indication contraire du contexte, les [. . .] intervenants» sont compris parmi les parties.  Le paragraphe 8(9) de la Constitutional Questions Act, R.S.S. 1978, ch. C-29, dispose que, lorsque le procureur général de la Saskatchewan comparaît relativement à une question constitutionnelle dans une instance devant un tribunal de la Saskatchewan, [TRADUCTION] «il est partie à l’appel de la décision rendue dans cette instance relativement soit à la validité ou à l’applicabilité d’une loi, soit au droit à une réparation».

Il ne fait aucun doute que la Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. était tenue de signifier au procureur général de la Saskatchewan la demande d’autorisation d’appel à notre Cour.  Par conséquent, il sera rendu une ordonnance intimant à la Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc. demanderesse de signifier au procureur général de la Saskatchewan la demande d’autorisation d’appel ainsi que tout autre document qu’elle déposera par la suite dans le cadre du présent dossier, et autorisant le procureur général de la Saskatchewan à produire sa réponse dans un délai de trente jours de la date de la signification.

Le procureur général de la Saskatchewan a droit aux dépens afférents à la présente requête, quelle que soit l’issue de l’affaire.

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

2000

- 2001 -