CONTENTS TABLE DES MATIÈRES
Applications for leave to appeal 196 - 199 Demandes d'autorisation d'appels
filed produites
Applications for leave submitted 200 - 210 Demandes soumises à la Cour depuis la
to Court since last issue dernière parution
Oral hearing ordered
- Audience ordonnée
Oral hearing on applications for
- Audience sur les demandes d'autorisation
leave
Judgments on applications for 211 - 222 Jugements rendus sur les demandes
leave d'autorisation
Motions 223 - 229 Requêtes
Notices of appeal filed since last
230 Avis d'appel produits depuis la dernière
issue
parution
Notices of intervention filed since - Avis d'intervention produits depuis la
last issue dernière parution
Notices of discontinuance filed since
- Avis de désistement produits depuis la
last issue dernière parution
Appeals heard since last issue and 231 - 232 Appels entendus depuis la dernière
disposition parution et résultat
Pronouncements of appeals reserved
- Jugements rendus sur les appels en
délibéré
Headnotes of recent judgments
- Sommaires des arrêts récents
Weekly agenda
233 Ordre du jour de la semaine
Summaries of the cases
- Résumés des affaires
Cumulative Index - Leave
- Index cumulatif - Autorisations
Cumulative Index - Appeals
- Index cumulatif - Appels
Appeals inscribed - Session
- Pourvois inscrits - Session
beginning
commençant le
Notices to the Profession and
- Avis aux avocats et communiqué
Press Release de presse
Deadlines: Motions before the Court 234 Délais: Requêtes devant la Cour
Deadlines: Appeals
235 Délais: Appels
Judgments reported in S.C.R. - Jugements publiés au R.C.S.
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FILED
|
DEMANDES D'AUTORISATION D'APPEL PRODUITES |
William Sean Quick
Sheldon Goldberg
v. (23757)
Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)
Bruce Johnstone
Counsel for the A.G. of B.C.
FILING DATE 17.1.1994
Melvin Darnell Engerdahl
Sheldon Goldberg
v. (23758)
Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)
Wendy Rubin
Counsel for the A.G. of B.C.)
FILING DATE 17.1.1994
Regional Assessment Commissioner et al.
Edward L. Gladu, Q.C.
Lang Michener
v. (23904)
Donald Graham et al. (Ont.)
William F. Burrows, Q.C.
Nelligan/Power
FILING DATE 20.1.1994
Christopher Correia
P.G. Lister, Q.C.
Lister & Assoc.
v. (23920)
Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)
J. Watson
A.G. of Alberta
FILING DATE 14.1.1994
Rosemary Nobert
Lorne W. Scott, Q.C.
Singleton Urquhart MacDonald
v. (23952)
Her Majesty The Queen (Alta.)
Peter W.L. Martin, Q.C.
Agent for Alberta Justice
FILING DATE 13.1.1994
Réjeanne Brault
Johanne Denis
Delorme & Denis
c. (23953)
Gérald Fontaine (Qué.)
Yvon Robichaud
Robichaud, Guertin & Assoc.
DATE DE PRODUCTION 14.1.1994
Alouette Amusements Canada Inc.
Jacques Larochelle
c. (23954)
Le Sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec (Qué.)
Pierre Zemaitis
Veillette & Assoc.
DATE DE PRODUCTION 18.1.1994
Andre Tousignant
Robert Lemieux
c. (23955)
Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)
James Rondeau
Subs. procureur général
DATE DE PRODUCTION 11.1.1994
Donald Gordon Butchart
Clayton C. Ruby
Ruby & Edwardh
v. (23956)
Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)
Catherine A. Cooper
Min. of the A.G.
FILING DATE 21.1.1994
International Lottery Distributors Inc. et al.
William R. Murray
v. (23958)
The Government of Manitoba et al. (Man.)
Thompson, Dorfman, Sweatman
FILING DATE 11.1.1994
Millstream Enterprises Ltd.
William N. Fritz
Fritz Lail Dougans & Shirreff
v. (23959)
Corporation of the City of New Westminster (B.C.)
David M. Twining
Guild, Yule & Co.
FILING DATE 14.1.1994
La Compagnie Minière Québec Cartier
Claude Larose
Lavery, de Billy
c. (23960)
Les Métallurgistes Unis d'Amérique, Local 6869 (Qué.)
André Gauthier
Gauthier, Nepveu, Leblanc & Brouillette
DATE DE PRODUCTION 20.1.1994
Insurance Corp. of British Columbia
Mark M. Skorah
Harper Grey Easton
v. (23961)
Eric Michael Petersen (B.C.)
Val J. LeBlanc
FILING DATE 21.1.1994
Thalayasingam Sivakumar
Lorne Waldman
v. (23962)
The Minister of Employment and Immigration (F.C.A.)(Ont.)
John C. Tait, Q.C.
Dep. A.G. of Canada
FILING DATE 4.1.1994
No. 100 Sail View Ventures Ltd.
Gary S. Snarch
Snarch & Allen
v. (23965)
Janwest Equities Ltd. (B.C.)
Harvey J. Grey, Q.C.
Harper Grey Easton
FILING DATE 18.1.1994
Michaela Valentova Baron
Chantal Perreault
Leduc, LeBel
c. (23967)
Tommy Karas et al. (Qué.)
France Rochon
Brissette, St-Jacques, Trépanier, Lamarre
DATE DE PRODUCTION 2.2.1994
Henri-Paul Loubier
c. (23969)
Sa Majesté La Reine (Qué.)
Jacques Tardif
Subs du procureur général
DATE DE PRODUCTION 19.1.1994
Garfield Wheatle
Susan Mulligan
v. (23970)
Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.)
Eric Siebenmorgen
A.G. of Ont.
FILING DATE 20.1.1994
Eugene Bekar
Michael J. Kierans
v. (23971)
Patricia Jean Bekar (B.C.)
Paul M. Pakenham
Hope Heinrich
FILING DATE 24.1.1994
Regina
Robert A. Mulligan
Office of Crown Counsel
v. (23972)
R.H.J. (B.C.)
David N. Lyon
FILING DATE 24.1.1994
Her Majesty The Queen in right of Ontario et al.
T.C. Marshall, Q.C.
Min. of the A.G.
v. (23973)
Antonio Prete (Ont.)
Chris G. Paliare
Gowling, Strathy & Henderson
FILING DATE 24.1.1994
Rajendra Kumar
Edmund G. Dorchester
Taylor Bardal & Dorchester
v. (23975)
Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.)
Robert J. Climie
Min. of the A.G.
FILING DATE 26.1.1994
Safwat Milad
Emilio Binavince
Grant Binavince Dawn
v. (23976)
Naguib Milad (Ont.)
W.A. Derry Millar
Weir & Foulds
FILING DATE 28.1.1994
Les Laboratoires Nordic Inc.
Robert Dulude, c.r.
Coutu & Assoc.
c. (23977)
Rock Gagnon et al. (Qué.)
Marc Savoie
Fournier, Demers
DATE DE PRODUCTION 31.1.1994
Canadian Union of Postal Workers
Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo
Cavalluzzo, Hayes & Shilton
v. (23989)
Canada Labour Relations Board et al. (F.C.A.)(Ont.)
FILING DATE 8.2.1994
Gilles Riendeau
c. (23902)
Economical Compagnie mutuelle d'assurance (Qué.)
Favreau Beauchesne Doré St-Onge & Fiset
DATE DE PRODUCTION 8.2.1994
Harbanse Singh Doman
Marvin R.V. Storrow, Q.C.
Blake, Cassels & Graydon
v. (23979)
Superintendent of Brokers et al. (B.C.)
Joseph J. Arvay, Q.C.
Arvay Finlay
FILING DATE 31.1.1994
Marcy Lucinda Bateman et al.
Barry R. Morrison, Q.C.
Clark, Drummie & Co.
v. (23980)
Dr. Daniel Doiron et al. (N.B.)
Donald Gillis, Q.C.
Gilbert, McGloan, Gillis
FILING DATE 28.1.1994
Joan Desloges
Peter J. Bishop
Bishop, Brooker
v. (23981)
Canadian Kennel Club (Ont.)
Elana Levinson
Kerzner, Papazian, MacDermid
FILING DATE 31.1.1994
Claude Saint-Laurent
Christian Desrosiers
Desrosiers, Turcotte, Groulx
v. (23982)
M. le juge Michel Hétu et al. (Qué.)
DATE DE PRODUCTION 4.2.1994
Hugh Vincent Lunn
David A. Haas
v. (23983)
Her Majesty The Queen (M.A.C.C.)
Office of the Judge Advocate General
FILING DATE 7.2.1994
Chang-Jie Chen
Constance Nakatsu
v. (23984)
The Minister of Employment and Immigration et al. (F.C.A.)
John C. Tait
Dept. of Justice
FILING DATE 3.2.1994
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE SUBMITTED TO COURT SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
REQUÊTES SOUMISES À LA COUR DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
FEBRUARY 9, 1994 / LE 9 FÉVRIER 1994
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER AND CORY AND IACOBUCCI JJ. /
LE JUGE EN CHEF LAMER ET LES JUGES CORY ET IACOBUCCI
Percival Whitley
v. (23890)
Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Procedural law - Defence - Trial - Appeals - Complainant sexually assaulted by Applicant and two co-accused - Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on the issue of consent - Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to leave to the jury the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s. 265(3) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge's instructions on the issue of consent would not have confused the jury but would have merely made it clear to them that it was necessary for them to find that the complainant's consent was real - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that there was nothing which supported or would give "an air of reality" to the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying a high standard for the availability of the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent and breached the Applicant's rights under ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
January 22, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (Locke J.) |
Conviction: One count of sexual assault |
December 8, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Brooke, Carthy and Galligan JJ.A.) |
Appeal against conviction dismissed; Appeal against sentence allowed |
January 13, 1994 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Timothy Erin Mowers
v. (23891)
Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Procedural law - Defence - Trial - Appeals - Complainant sexually assaulted by Applicant and two co-accused - Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on the issue of consent - Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to leave to the jury the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s. 265(3) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge's instructions on the issue of consent would not have confused the jury but would have merely made it clear to them that it was necessary for them to find that the complainant's consent was real - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that there was nothing which supported or would give "an air of reality" to the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying a high standard for the availability of the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent and breached the Applicant's rights under ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
January 22, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (Locke J.) |
Conviction: One count of sexual assault |
December 8, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Brooke, Carthy and Galligan JJ.A.)
|
Appeal against conviction dismissed; Appeal against sentence allowed |
January 13, 1994 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Gordon Tempelaar
v. (23909)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal law - Offences - Sentencing - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in holding that when faced with a verdict of guilt, the factual basis for which is ambiguous, the trial judge is entitled to arrive at his own conclusions for the purpose of sentencing - Whether the ruling of the Court of Appeal is contrary to s. 7 of the Charter which imputes the right to presumption of innocence to the sentencing process - Application of R. v. Tuckey (1985), 20 C.C.C. (3d) 501 (Ont. C.A.).
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
April 30, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (Moore J.) |
Conviction: Sexual Assault |
May 7, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (Moore J.) |
Sentence: 30 months imprisonment |
July 14, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Houlden, Tarnopolsky and Krever, JJ.A.) |
Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed |
December 16, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Ernest A. Hawrish
v. (23898)
Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(Sask.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Procedural law - Appeal - Offenses - Applicant acting as solicitor for a venture capital corporation that sought equity capital to invest in a restaurant of which he was part owner - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its definition of the actus reus of the theft by conversion and defined it in a manner unknown to the law - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in affirming the conviction for theft by conversion on a basis which was not advanced by the Respondent at trial or in the Court of Appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its determination that the conviction on the second count of fraud was not unreasonable.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
September 6, 1991 Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Grotsky J.) |
Conviction: 1 count of theft; 2 counts of fraud |
October 14, 1993 Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan (Cameron, Wakeling and Jackson JJ.A.) |
Appeal against conviction dismissed |
December 13, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Ranjit Gill
v. (23903)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Offences - Defence - Evidence - Second degree murder - Intoxication - Defence of provocation - Whether the test for provocation stipulated in s. 232(2) of the Criminal Code involves an objective or a subjective test - Whether the trial judge ought to have instructed the jury to take into consideration the Applicant's cultural background, his relationship with the deceased and intoxication in determining whether the Applicant acted on the sudden and before there was time for his passion to cool.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
November 24, 1988 Supreme Court of British Columbia (Murray J.) |
Conviction: Second degree murder |
May 28, 1992 Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Seaton, Toy and Rowles, JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed |
December 10, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for an extension of time filed |
December 15, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
CORAM: LA FOREST, SOPINKA AND MAJOR JJ. /
LES JUGES LA FOREST, SOPINKA ET MAJOR
Fred Harvey
v. (23968)
Attorney General for New Brunswick
Minister of Municipalities, Culture and Housing,
Dennis Cochrane and Hazen Myers (N.B.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Civil rights - Right to vote and to be qualified for membership in a legislative assembly - Whether that portion of s. 119(c) of the Elections Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. E-3, which purports to disqualify a person who is convicted of having committed a corrupt or illegal practice, during the five years following his conviction, from being elected to or sitting in the legislative assembly is a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter to the rights guaranteed in s. 3 of the Charter - Whether that portion of s. 119(c) of the Elections Act which, in the case of a person convicted of having committed a corrupt or illegal practice who at the date of conviction has been elected to the legislative assembly, purports to vacate his seat from the time of such conviction is a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter to the rights guaranteed in s. 3 of the Charter - Whether those portions of s. 119 which are inconsistent with the Charter are severable from the remaining portions of the section.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
March 9, 1993 Court of Queen's Bench (Dickson J.) |
Application allowed in part: S. 119 of the Elections Act declared inconsistent in part with the Charter |
November 10, 1993 Court of Appeal (Rice [dissenting], Ayles and Ryan JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed and cross-appeal allowed |
January 10, 1994 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Rodolfo Pacificador
v. (23792)
Republic of the Philippines (Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Extradition - Criminal law - Procedural law - Statutes - Interpretation - Evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not holding that the evidentiary threshold applicable to committal for extradition under s. 18(1)(b) of the Extradition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-21, is contrary to the rights guaranteed under s. 7 of the Charter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the purported arrest from the Respondent was sufficient - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that sufficient evidence had been adduced at the extradition hearing to establish that the person before the Court was the person referred to in the extradition request - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in confirming that the Applicant was not entitled to adduce evidence of the recanting affidavits of a witness - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the RCMP officer was not a compellable witness for the defence.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
October 5, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (Watt J.) |
Warrant of committal issued |
February 5, 1993 Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (German J.)
|
Application for writ of habeas corpus with certiorari dismissed |
July 29, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Lacourcière, Goodman and Doherty JJ.A.)
|
Appeal dismissed |
November 28, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Scottish & York Insurance Co. Limited and
Victoria Insurance Company of Canada
v. (23841)
Co-Operators General Insurance Company and Frank J. Csar,
Liquidator of Security Casualty Company and George Ayton (Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Statutes - Interpretation - Applicants bringing actions in the Federal Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of Ontario - Legislation amended granting concurrent jurisdiction to provincial courts - Applicants' application to add Her Majesty the Queen as a party defendant to the action dismissed by the Supreme Court of Ontario - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that s. 21 of the Crown Liability Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-50, as amended by S.C. 1990, c. 8, was meant to apply to litigants who as a matter of necessity had commenced an action in Federal Court against Her Majesty the Queen - Whether the Act to amend the Federal Court Act, the Crown Liability Act, and the Supreme Court Act, S.C. 1990, c. 8, was intended to afford existing litigants, as distinct from future litigants, access to the amendments establishing concurrent provincial jurisdiction over claims against Her Majesty the Queen - Whether it is the law of Canada that a party is precluded from exercising the newly established concurrent provincial court jurisdiction in actions against Her Majesty the Queen because of a "pending" Federal Court action which, if discontinued, would afford Her Majesty the Queen a limitation defence She would not otherwise have - Whether the repeal in its entirety of s. 21(2) of the Crown Liability Act and its replacement in identical language by the Act to amend only precluded litigants who after the date of such repeal and replacement elected to sue in Federal Court, from taking advantage of the newly established concurrent provincial court jurisdiction, or whether it precluded extant litigants, who did not have the ability to make a choice of forum when their litigation was commenced, from exercising the newly established concurrent provincial court jurisdiction.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
June 19, 1992 Supreme Court of Ontario (Roberts J.) |
Applicants' application to add Her Majesty the Queen as a party defendant dismissed |
October 4, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Galligan, Labrosse and Arbour JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed |
December 2, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Tom Strickland, on behalf of himself and all members of
the Association of Professional Engineers of
Saskatchewan employed by the Saskatchewan Institute
of Applied Science and Technology
v. (23864)
Ralph Ermel, on behalf of himself and all members of
the S.G.E.U. SIAST academic bargaining unit and
Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science and Technology (Sask.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Labour law - Labour relations - Collective agreement - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether s. 14(3) of The Institute Act, S.S. 1986-87-88, c. I-9.1, infringes the Applicants' rights as guaranteed by s. 2(d) of the Charter by requiring them to be part of a particular bargaining unit - Whether s. 36 of The Trade Union Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. T-17, infringes certain of the Applicants' rights as guaranteed by s. 2(d) of the Charter by requiring them to obtain and/or maintain membership in a designated union.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
May 6, 1992 Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Wright J.) |
Applicants' action dismissed |
September 29, 1993 Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan (Wakeling, Gerwing and Sherstobitoff JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed |
December 7, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
David Deshane and Dorothy Deshane on behalf of all
persons entitled pursuant to the Family Law Reform
Act, and the said Dorothy Deshane
v. (23870)
Deere & Company (Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Torts - Procedural law - Appeals - Damages - Product liability - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the common law allows manufacturers to refrain from warning users about known or foreseeable dangers associated with their products if it can be said that the danger is "obvious", notwithstanding that it is foreseeable to the manufacturer that the user of the product may not be fully aware of the danger - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in treating the issue of obviousness of danger as a question on which it was entitled to substitute its view in the place of the clear factual findings of a jury - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in disposing of the appeal on a basis not advanced by the Respondent either at trial or in the Court of Appeal.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
October 10, 1990 Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (Hawkins J.)
|
Applicants' action allowed |
October 1, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Dubin C.J.O., Lacourcière [dissenting] and Galligan JJ.A.)
|
Appeal allowed |
November 30, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
CORAM: L'HEUREUX-DUBÉ, GONTHIER AND McLACHLIN JJ. /
LES JUGES L'HEUREUX-DUBÉ, GONTHIER ET McLACHLIN
Sa Majesté La Reine
c. (23906)
Renaud Charbonneau (Crim.)(Qué.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit criminel - Infractions - Preuve - Conduite avec facultés affaiblies et avec un taux d'alcoolémie supérieur à 80 milligrammes par 100 millilitres de sang - La Cour d'appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en droit en affirmant qu'un écart de 22 milligrammes d'alcool par 100 millilitres de sang entre deux résultats d'analyse constitue, à lui seul, une preuve contraire au sens de l'article 258(1) du Code criminel?
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 17 mai 1991 Cour du Québec, chambre criminelle et pénale (Gobeil, J.C.Q.)
|
Acquittement: 1) Conduite avec facultés affaiblies; 2) conduite avec un taux d'alcoolémie supérieur à 80 mg par 100 ml de sang |
Le 25 octobre 1991 Cour supérieure du Québec (Jourdain J.C.S.) |
Déclaration de culpabilité: Conduite avec un taux d'alcoolémie supérieur à 80 mg d'alcool par 100 ml de sang; Arrêt des procédures: Conduite avec facultés affaiblies; |
Le 19 octobre 1993 Cour d'appel du Québec (LeBel, Gendreau et Rousseau-Houle, JJ.C.A.)
|
Appel accueilli |
Le 15 décembre 1993 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel déposée |
A.J.L.
v. (23919)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Alta.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Statutes - Young offenders - Offences - Evidence - Interpretation - Possession of stolen property - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in distinguishing the applicability of this Court's decision in R. v. Terrence, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 357, and inferring the necessary control for the Applicant under s. 4(3) of the Criminal Code - Whether evidence of flight can amount to evidence of common knowledge and consent as required by s. 4(3)(b) of the Criminal Code.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
March 29, 1993 Provincial Court of Alberta, Youth Division (Witten, P.C.J.) |
Conviction: Possession of stolen property over $1000 |
November 1, 1993 Court of Appeal of Alberta (Foisy, Stratton and Trussler, JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed |
December 7, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada (LaForest J.) |
Motion to extend time to file an application for leave to appeal to December 7, 1993, granted |
December 7, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
C.C.
v. (23920)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Alta.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Statutes - Young offenders - Offences - Evidence - Interpretation - Possession of stolen property - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in distinguishing the applicability of this Court's decision in R. v. Terrence, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 357, and inferring the necessary control for the Applicant under s. 4(3) of the Criminal Code - Whether evidence of flight can amount to evidence of common knowledge and consent as required by s. 4(3)(b) of the Criminal Code.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
March 29, 1993 Provincial Court of Alberta, Youth Division (Witten, P.C.J.) |
Conviction: Possession of stolen property over $1000 |
November 1, 1993 Court of Appeal of Alberta (Foisy, Stratton and Trussler, JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed |
December 14, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada (LaForest J.) |
Motion to extend time to file an application for leave to appeal to December 14, 1993, granted |
December 14, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Gilles Riendeau
c. (23902)
Economical Compagnie Mutuelle d'Assurance (Qué.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Procédure - Procédure civile - Action - Appel - Rejet d'appel - Assurance - Incendie - Action en réclamation d'une indemnité d'assurance suite aux dommages causés à une maison et à son contenu lors d'une incendie rejetée - Appel interjeté par une personne qui n'est pas représentée -Appel irrégulièrement formé - Requête pour rejet d'appel accueillie.
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 17 février 1993 Cour supérieure du Québec (Mercure j.c.s.) |
Action en réclamation d'une indemnité d'assurance contre l'intimée, l'assureur |
Le 9 septembre 1993 Cour d'appel du Québec (Tourigny, Baudouin et Chamberland jj.c.a.) |
Requête de l'intimée pour rejet d'appel accueillie |
Le 9 décembre 1993 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel et de prorogation de délai |
Réal Roy et Clément Roy
c. (23918)
La Corporation municipale de St-Jules, cté Beauce (Qué.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Procédure - Procédure civile - Appel - La Cour d'appel aurait-elle dû considérer la requête introductive d'instance des demandeurs aux fins de l'appel prévu à l'art. 44.2 de la Loi sur l'expropriation, L.R.Q. 1977, ch. E-24? - Critères applicables concernant la requête pour permission spéciale d'appeler prévue à l'art. 523 du Code de procédure civile, L.R.Q. 1977, ch. C-25 - "Impossibilité d'agir plus tôt" - En quoi les demandeurs n'ont pas réussi devant la Cour d'appel à établir les conditions prévues à l'art. 523? - Cité de Pont Viau c. Gauthier Mfg. Ltd., [1978] 2 R.C.S. 516.
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 6 avril 1993 Cour supérieure du Québec (Gervais j.c.s.) |
Requête pour contester le droit de l'intimée à l'expropriation rejetée |
Le 7 juin 1993 Cour d'appel du Québec (Bisson j.c.q., Rousseau-Houle et Delisle jj.c.a.) |
Requête pour rejet d'appel accueillie |
Le 1er novembre 1993 Cour d'appel du Québec (Bisson j.c.q., LeBel et Otis jj.c.a.) |
Requête pour permission spéciale d'appeler rejetée |
Le 31 décembre 1993 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel déposée |
JUDGMENTS ON APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE |
JUGEMENTS RENDUS SUR LES DEMANDES D'AUTORISATION |
FEBRUARY 10, 1994 / LE 10 FÉVRIER 1994
23684 La compagnie minière Lamaque Ltée - c. - Le sous-ministre de l'énergie et des ressources du Québec (Qué.)
CORAM: Le Juge en chef et les juges L'Heureux-Dubé et Sopinka
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation - Respondent assessing Applicant and disallowing hedging losses claimed under "operating expenses of the mine" - Applicant's motion to cancel assessment dismissed by the Provincial Court - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting s. 8 of the Mining Duties Act - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the hedging losses incurred by the Applicant do not qualify as operating expenses of the mine within the meaning of s. 8 of the Act - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to apply to the Act the case law dealing with other taxation statutes which have held that hedging transactions, in particular, losses associated thereto form part of the operating expenses of an enterprise thereby taking a functional and contextual approach to the issue in litigation.
23721 Canadian Pacific Limited - v. - Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and McLachlin and Major JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Environment law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Constitutional law - Statutes - Interpretation - Division of powers - Railways - Applicant acquitted on charges of discharging or permitting the discharge of an environmental contaminant, smoke, contrary to s. 13(1)(a) of the Ontario Environmental Protection Act - Whether provincial legislation in respect of the protection and conservation of the environment applies to federal works and undertakings - Whether s. 13(1)(a) of the Act applies in respect of acts performed by an interprovincial railway to maintain its right-of-way - Whether a challenge to the constitutional validity of legislation on the ground that the legislation is so vague as to infringe the fundamental rights guaranteed by s. 7 of the Charter is to be determined only on facts specific to the case before the court - Whether s. 13(1)(a) of the Act is so vague as to infringe s. 7 of the Charter.
23748 Her Majesty the Queen - v. - Nathen Bernshaw (Crim.) (B.C.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Procedural law - Legislation - Interpretation - Evidence - Respondent convicted of having care and control of a motor vehicle while "over .08" - Whether the Court of Appeal erred by reading into s. 254(2) of the Criminal Code a requirement that a peace officer either ascertain when a subject consumed his last drink of alcohol or wait for a period of fifteen minutes before administering an approved screening device test - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that unless a peace officer either ascertains when a driver consumed his last drink of alcohol or waits at least fifteen minutes before administering an approved screening device test, then he cannot rely on a fail reading on the approved screening device test in making a breathalyser demand under s. 254(3) of the Criminal Code - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling, contrary to the decision in Rilling v. The Queen, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 183, that the results of an analysis of breath samples performed with an approved breathalyser instrument are automatically inadmissible in evidence if the Crown has not proved that the officer who made the demand for breath samples had reasonable and probable grounds as set out in s. 254(3) of the Criminal Code.
23711 Clifford Crawford - v. - Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Procedural law - Pre-trial procedure - Applicant and co-accused convicted of second degree murder - Applicant cross-examined by counsel for the co-accused on his failure to give a statement to the police - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the cross-examination of the Applicant on his failure to give a statement to the police by counsel for the Applicant's co-accused and the failure of the trial judge to instruct the jury to disregard that cross-examination did not violate his pre-trial right to silence protected in s. 7 of the Charter.
23739 Mayfield Investments Ltd. operating as the Mayfield Inn - v. - Gillian Stewart, Keith Stewart and Stuart David Pettie - and between - Gillian Stewart and Keith Stewart - v. - Mayfield Investments Ltd. operating as the Mayfield Inn and Stuart David Pettie (Alta.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The applications for leave to appeal are granted.
Les demandes d'autorisation d'appel sont accordées.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Torts - Damages - Negligence - Standard of care - Extent of liability - Causation - Respondent Gillian Stewart injured in motor vehicle accident following party at dinner theatre operated by the Applicant and attended by the Respondents - Respondent Pettie driving while intoxicated - Action in damages against the Applicant allowed - Liability to the public for service of liquor - Policy considerations in relation to the duty of care - Increased risk as proof of causation.
23772 Her Majesty the Queen - v. - Harriet Renae Giesecke (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory 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 - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Procedural law - Trial - Evidence - Respondent and co-accused tried together for murder of Respondent's husband - Intercepted communication between Respondent and co-accused's ex-girlfriend, who agreed to interception, admitted into evidence - Respondent convicted of first degree murder and co-accused acquitted - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the closing address to the jury by defence counsel for the co-accused was such that it resulted in a "miscarriage of justice" and denied the Respondent a fair trial - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the Applicant was prohibited from tendering the evidence of the consensually intercepted private communications even though the Court expressly refrained from determining the admissibility of that evidence under s. 24(2) of the Charter.
23815 Lawrence Hibbert - v. - Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal Law - Offences - Defence - Jury trial - Duress - Whether the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that duress operated as a defence by negativing the common intention required for party liability - Whether the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that duress was negated by the availability of a "a safe avenue of escape" - Whether the trial judge erred in failing to instruct the jury that the "fact" of a "safe avenue of escape" was to be determined by reference to the Applicant's actual state of mind.
23813 Kwong Hung Chan - v. - The Minister of Employment and Immigration (B.C.) (F.C.A.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Immigration - Statutes - Interpretation - Convention refugee status - Fear of persecution - "Particular social group" - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal's failure to follow established precedent in Cheung (1993), 102 D.L.R. (4th) 214, has created conflicting diverting authorities defining the parameters of "particular social group".
23786 Her Majesty the Queen - v. - Timothy Lawrence Houlahan (Crim.) (Man.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Evidence - Co-accused counsel's submission to the jury - Charge to the jury -Whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting the Respondent a new trial based on the fact that the joint trial had resulted in a miscarriage of justice to the Respondent caused by the cumulative effect of counsel for the co-accused in his address to the jury commenting unfavourably on the Respondent's failure to testify and the trial judge's error in his charge in overstating the Crown's theory.
23843 Her Majesty the Queen - v. - Bevin Bervmary McIntosh (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Statutes - Interpretation - Defence - Respondent charged with second degree murder but convicted of manslaughter - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of ss. 34(2) and 35 of the Criminal Code - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that one who provokes an assault or is an initial aggressor may avail himself of the defence set out in s. 34(2) of the Criminal Code - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge erred in advising the jury that s. 35 of the Criminal Code defines the nature and scope of the force which a person may use to defend himself after he has provoked an assault on himself and the steps which he must take before the force used in response can be justified - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not applying s. 686(1)(b)(iii).
23856 Enoch Bempong - v. - Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory 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 - Narcotics - Trial - Evidence - Applicant tried on an indictment charging him with the offences of conspiracy to import heroin and conspiracy to traffic in heroin - Applicant convicted of conspiracy to import heroin and verdict of acquittal directed on the charge of conspiracy to traffic in heroin - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the Applicant was not prejudiced by the fact that he was cross-examined by Crown counsel in relation to the charge of conspiracy to traffic, despite the subsequent directed verdict of acquittal in relation to that charge, and the lack of any cautionary instructions to the jury, directing them to disregard that evidence and/or to presume the Applicant to be innocent of those allegations - Whether the inference which the jury was asked to draw from the circumstances surrounding the delivery of the woman and the property to Agent Bell, was in law an invitation to the jury to engage in unlawful speculation - Grdic v. The Queen, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 810.
23878 D.M.S. - v. - Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Alta.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory 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 - Young offenders - First degree murder - Transfer to ordinary court - Application of s. 16 of the Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1 - Whether the Alberta Court of Appeal erred in imposing upon the Young Person the onus of establishing that he was unlikely to be involved in future acts of dangerousness - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ignoring the findings of fact made by the Youth Court Judge that transfer of the Young Person was not necessary in the interests of protection of the public or rehabilitation of the Young Person - Whether the Court of Appeal ignored or misapprehended the evidence of the psychologist, and ignored the evidence of the psychiatrist whose report the Court requested prior to hearing the appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in considering general deterrence as a relevant criterion in the balancing process required by s. 16(1.1) of the Young Offenders Act.
23796 C.A.S. - v. - J.F.T. and F.M.T. (B.C.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice and Cory 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
Family law - Adoption - Infants - Applicant consenting to private adoption of her child pursuant to Child Welfare Act, S.A. 1984, c. C-8.1 - Applicant seeking to revoke her consent without conforming to the Child Welfare Act's requirement of written notice within ten days -Whether Applicant's consent to adoption pursuant to the requirements of the Child Welfare Act was valid - Whether consent was revoked by oral notice - Whether the trial judge could vitiate the consent on the basis of equitable principles - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the best interest of the child was not to revoke the consent.
23715 Anne Marie Mumford, an infant who sues by her mother and next friend Frances Mumford, and Frances Mumford v. Health Sciences Centre and Dr. Charles Ferguson - and - The St. Boniface General Hospital, Dr. David Grewar and Dr. Leonard Greenberg - and - Dr. Maurice C. Crocker and Dr. William Tweed - and - The St. Boniface General Hospital, Dr. Paraskevopulos and Dr. L. Khan - and - Dr. Chubaty (Man.)
CORAM: La Forest, Cory 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
Torts - Negligence - Physicians and surgeons - Interpretation - Standard of care - Whether the Respondents were negligent in not diagnosing the child's illness which resulted in her undergoing two operations or, if they diagnosed the child properly, whether they were negligent in taking so long in doing so - Child permanently disabled following cardiac arrest during the second operation - Whether the Manitoba Court of Appeal erred in interpreting and applying the principle of law of causation as pertaining to medical malpractice cases, which principles were enunciated by this Court in the decision of Farrell v. Snell, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 311.
23696 Seaferers' International Union of Canada v. Canada Labour Relations Board and Rowan Canada Ltd. and Attorney General of Nova Scotia (F.C.A.)
CORAM: La Forest, Cory 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
Constitutional law - Division of powers - Labour law - Certification - Statutes - Interpretation - Applicant applying for certification as bargaining agent for employees of offshore drilling platform located in offshore area as defined in the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act - Respondent company opposing application on the ground that Respondent Board has no jurisdiction because the Trade Union Act and not the Canada Labour Code is applicable pursuant to s. 157 of the Implementation Act - Applicant claiming that s. 157 of the Implementation Act is invalid - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s. 157 of the Implementation Act was a constitutional delegation of legislative authority - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in applying Furtney v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 54 - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in stating that s. 157(5) of the Implementation Act was severable from the rest of s. 157.
23734 Eric Ralph Biddle v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: La Forest, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Pre-trial procedure - Jury selection - Selection of all-female jury - Operative jury selection provisions of the Criminal Code predating R. v. Bain, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 91 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the use by the Crown of its stand-aside power to tailor the jury did not constitute an abuse of the jury selection process or create a reasonable apprehension of partiality - Interpretation of R. v. Bain.
23717 Shaw Cable Systems (B.C.) Ltd. and Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission v. British Columbia Telephone Co. and Telecommunications Workers' Union (F.C.A.)
CORAM: La Forest, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is limited to a defence of its jurisdiction and clarification of the record.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée. Le Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes est limité à une défense de sa compétence et à une clarification du dossier.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Labour law - Labour relations - Collective agreement - Judicial review - Applicant CRTC requiring the Respondent Company to comply with its obligations to permit the Applicant Shaw and any other cable licensees to instal their own cable on the Respondent Company support structures - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the CRTC does not have the power to make an order to avoid the conferring of an undue preference by a telephone company if compliance with that order would require the company to violate its collective agreement - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the jurisdiction of the CRTC pursuant to the Railway Act and the National Telecommunications Powers and Procedures Act is limited by the provisions of a collective agreement - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there were conflicting tribunal decisions that produced a patently unreasonable result - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying the test for determining the standard of judicial review pursuant to U.E.S., Local 298 v. Bibeault, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 1048 - Whether the powers of regulatory bodies and their ability to fulfil their statutory mandate can be restricted by private agreement.
23740 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick, as represented by the Minister of Finance v. Coopers & Lybrand Ltd. (N.B.)
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka and Major 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 - Statutes - Interpretation - Bankruptcy - Receivership - Respondent appointed interim receiver - Applicant bringing action for amount of provincial sales tax during the period of interim receivership - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act, absolve an interim receiver from collecting or remitting provincial sales tax - Does the Bankruptcy Act allow for the distribution of the taxes collected to creditors of the bankrupt in preference to the province and without recourse by the Province against the receiver? - Did the Respondent act properly and within its mandate when it failed to ensure that trust money, in the form of sales tax, was segregated, accounted for and remitted to the Applicant? - Was the Respondent a "receiver" pursuant to s. 15.01(1) of the Social Services and Education Tax Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. S-10? -Was the Respondent a "vendor" for the purposes of the Social Services and Education Tax Act? - Did the Respondent breach the provisions of the Social Services and Education Tax Act and ss. 5, 7 and 26 of the Revenue Administration Act, S.N.B. 1983, c. R-10.22? - Did the Respondent have a duty as an officer appointed by the Court pursuant to the Bankruptcy Act.
23778 Telecommunications Workers Union v. Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission, Shaw Cable Systems (B.C.) Ltd. and British Columbia Telephone Co. (F.C.A.)
CORAM: La Forest, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Labour law - Labour relations - Collective agreement - Judicial review - Respondent CRTC requiring the Respondent Company to comply with its obligations to permit the Respondent Shaw and any other cable licensees to instal their own cable on the Respondent Company support structures - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the CRTC does not have the power to make an order to avoid the conferring of an undue preference by a telephone company if compliance with that order would require the company to violate its collective agreement - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the jurisdiction of the CRTC pursuant to the Railway Act and the National Telecommunications Powers and Procedures Act is limited by the provisions of a collective agreement - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there were conflicting tribunal decisions that produced a patently unreasonable result - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying the test for determining the standard of judicial review pursuant to U.E.S., Local 298 v. Bibeault, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 1048 - Whether the powers of regulatory bodies and their ability to fulfil their statutory mandate can be restricted by private agreement - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to declare that the Applicant was entitled to notice of the hearings before the CRTC concerning the "Support Structure Agreement" involving the Company and Shaw.
23783 Timothy William MacKinlay, Bradford MacKinlay, Ghlee MacKinlay and Carrie MacKinlay v. Lulu Ellen MacKinlay (N.S.)
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka and Major JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on a solicitor-client basis to be paid out of the estate.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens comme entre procureur et client à prélever sur la succession.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Property law - Wills - Whether a codicil executed by the testator revived his will which was revoked by his marriage - Sections 19 and 21 of the Wills Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 505.
23784 Manson Insulation Inc. and Crossroads Industries & Distributors Inc. v. Wallace Construction Specialties Ltd. (Sask.)
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka and Major 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 - Torts - Contracts - Damages - Assessment - Tort of conspiracy - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that a simple breach of contract is actionable against the contractbreaker in conspiracy - Whether the Court failed to conclude that the agreement to breach the contract merged with the actual breach of contract, with the result that the appropriate damages for breach of contract were arbitrarily inflated - Whether the Court erred in permitting the general award and punitive award of damages for conspiracy to stand when the jury had already assessed a lesser amount for breach of contract - Whether the decision of the Court of Appeal distorts the distinction between contract and tort and the distinction between an action for breach of contract and an action for inducing breach of contract.
23773 Kobe Ter Neuzen v. Dr. Gerald Korn (B.C.)
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka and Major JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Torts - Negligence - Contracts - Damages - Physicians and surgeons - Sale - Applicant infected with HIV virus as a result of artificial insemination procedure performed by the Respondent - When are the general standards of liability for negligence applicable in a medical negligence case where it is alleged that, even if there is a common medical practice, the practice itself does not reflect the general standard of prudent and diligent conduct? - When can a jury find an approved practice negligent? - What is the standard of care expected of a medical practitioner who is practising in two overlapping and developing areas of medicine. Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the verdict of a jury and finding there was no evidence to support the jury's finding of fact and ordering a new trial - When does the upper limit of non-pecuniary damages not apply in a personal injury action? - Is a doctor who supplies goods which injure a patient liable pursuant to common law contract principles or sale of goods legislation?
23650 Audrey Hill v. The Registrar, South Alberta Land Registration District (Alta.)
CORAM: L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka and Gonthier 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 - Statutes - Interpretation - Limitation of actions - Applicant claiming compensation from the Land Titles Assurance Fund following deprivation of land by the registration of another person as owner of the land - When is a person deprived of an estate or interest in land entitled to compensation from the Fund - When does the six year limitation period start to run for a person seeking compensation from the Fund - Whether the discoverability rule as set out in Central Trust v. Rafuse, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 147, applies to the provisions of the Land Titles Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. LR-5, providing for compensation under the Land Titles Assurance Fund.
23345 Le Procureur général du Québec, Régie des télécommunications du Québec et André Dufour et Jean-Marc Demers c. Téléphone Guèvremont Inc. (Qué.)
CORAM: Les juges L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et McLachlin
La demande de prorogation d'appel incident et la demande d'autorisation d'appel incident sont accordées.
The application for extension of time on leave to cross-appeal and the application for leave to cross-appeal are granted.
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit constitutionnel - Droit administratif - Partage des pouvoirs - Compétence - Interprétation - Jugement déclaratoire portant que la Régie n'a pas compétence sur l'intimée - L'entreprise de l'intimée constitue-t-elle une entreprise fédérale aux fins des articles 92(10)a) et 91(29) de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867? - Demande d'autorisation d'appel incident pour que, dans l'éventualité où l'appel des appelants serait accueilli, le présent dossier soit retourné à la Cour supérieure du district de Québec afin qu'il soit statué sur les autres moyens de droit administratif que soulevait l'intimée dans sa procédure originale et qui n'ont pas fait l'objet d'une adjudication par les tribunaux d'instance inférieure.
23850/51 Dans l'affaire de la liquidation de Les Coopérants, société mutuelle d'assurance-vie/Cooperants, Mutual Life Insurance Society et Firstcliff Development Inc. et als - ET - Raymond, Chabot, Fafard, Gagnon Inc., et Jean-Marie Bouchard, en sa qualité d'Inspecteur général des institutions financières du Québec, et als et Régie des rentes du Québec et Société canadienne d'indemnisation pour les assurances de personnes - ET ENTRE - Dans l'affaire de la liquidation de Les Coopérants, société mutuelle d'assurance-vie/Cooperants, Mutual Life Insurance Society et Firstcliff Development Inc. et als - ET - Raymond, Chabot, Fafard, Gagnon Inc., et Société canadienne d'indemnisation pour les assurances de personnes et als (Qué.)
CORAM: Les juges L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et McLachlin
Les demandes d'autorisation d'appel sont rejetées avec dépens.
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed with costs.
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit commercial - Droit des compagnies - Assurance - Liquidation - Créancier et débiteur - Créance prioritaire - Contrats de gestion de dépôts - Nature - Interprétation - Est-ce que certains contrats de gestion de dépôts des régimes enregistrés de retraite sont des polices visées par la priorité de l'article 161 (1) de la Loi sur les liquidations, L.R.C. 1985, c. W-11.
MOTIONS |
REQUÊTES |
28.1.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the case on appeal and the appellant's factum Alexander Krasniuk
v. (23808)
Her Majesty The Queen (Man.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du dossier d'appel et du mémoire de l'appelant |
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
28.1.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondents' factum
Edda Emilie Zeitel et al.
v. (22792)
Susan Diane Ellscheid et al. (Ont.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du mémoire des intimés |
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to January 28, 1994 nunc pro tunc.
28.1.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file a response
The Manufacturers Life Insurance Co.
v. (23901)
Marystown Shipyard Ltd. (Nfld.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production d'une réponse
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to January 31, 1994.
28.1.1994
Before / Devant: L'HEUREUX-DUBÉ J.
Motion to file certain additional evidence and materials relating to the Constitutional questions
Bruce Douglas Branch et al.
v. (22978)
B.C. Securities Commission (B.C.) |
Requête de production de certains éléments de preuves et de documents supplémentaires relatifs aux questions constitutionnelles
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
31.1.1994
Before / Devant: CORY J.
Motion on behalf of the appellant for an order: 1. excluding affidavits and exhibits filed by intervener; 2. granting leave to file a reply factum.
Motion on behalf of the intervener for an order: 1. affirming affidavits and exhibits; 2. to file ten copies of affidavits and exhibits; 3. for acceptance of memorandum of argument on leave to appeal over 20 pages; 4. for additional time to present oral argument
George Henry Howard
v. (22999)
Her Majesty The Queen et al. (Ont.) |
Requête au nom de l'appelant en vue d'obtenir une ordonnance: 1. excluant les affidavits et pièces produits par l'intervenant; 2. en autorisation de produire un mémoire en réplique.
Requête au nom de l'intervenant en vue d'obtenir une ordonnance: 1. confirmant les affidavits et pièces produits; 2. de produire 10 copies des affidavits et pièces; 3. en acceptation d'un mémoire de demande d'autorisation de plus de 20 pages; 4. en prorogation du temps accordé pour la plaidoirie William B. Henderson and Alan Pratt, for the appellant.
Tim McCabe, for the respondent Her Majesty The Queen.
John Edmond, for the intervener A.G. of Canada.
Timothy Danson, for the intervener O.F.A.H.
Thomas Berger, Q.C., for the intervener United Indian Councils. |
|
|
The following was ordered:
1. O.F.A.H. BE PERMITTED TO FILE a fresh evidence brief, namely the affidavits of J. Edward Hanna sworn October 4, 1993, along with exhibits 1, 17, 56 and 67, the supplementary affidavit of J. Edward Hanna sworn December 14, 1993, with exhibit A and the affidavit of Dale G. Miner sworn January 17, 1994, along with exhibits 1 to 6. The evidence of J. Edward Hanna is not to be considered as relevant to the issue of a new trial for the Appellant, that relief, not having been requested by either party;
2. O.F.A.H. BE PERMITTED TO FILE, as part of its fresh evidence brief, the affidavit of Robert J. Surtees sworn December 9, 1993, along with exhibits 1, 2 and 4, subject to counsel agreeing to the deletion, in the affidavit and exhibit 2 thereof, of expressions of material opinion which can reasonably be excised;
3. O.F.A.H. is GRANTED leave to file a 24 page factum by February 10, 1994, and to make a 15-minute oral argument at the hearing of the appeal;
4. the appellant is GRANTED leave to file a reply factum by February 17, 1994;
5. the Attorney General of Canada is GRANTED leave to intervene and to file a factum by February 10, 1994, and to make a 20-minute oral argument at the hearing of the appeal;
6. Costs of the motion are reserved to the panel hearing the appeal.
1.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER
Motion to state a constitutional question
Stanley Gordon Johnson
v. (23593)
Her Majesty The Queen (N.S.) |
Requête pour énoncer une question constitutionnelle
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
1. If the Tobacco Tax Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 470, or the Tobacco Marking Regulations, N.S. Reg. 51/91 or administrative practice thereunder require that a registered Indian, when acting as a retail vendor, sell, purchase or possess on an Indian reserve only tobacco obtained from or through a wholesaler holding a provincial wholesaler's permit, and that he or she either possess a provincial quota or pay in advance to the wholesaler the tobacco tax, or an equivalent amount, then are those enactments or practices constitutionally invalid, inapplicable or inoperative as being
|
1. S'ils exigent que, lorsqu'agit à titre de détaillant, un Indien inscrit ne vende, achète ou possède sur une réserve indienne que le tabac qu'il a obtenu directement ou par l'entremise d'un grossiste détenant un permis provincial, et qu'il ait un contingent provincial ou paie à l'avance au grossiste la taxe sur le tabac ou un montant équivalent, la Tobacco Tax Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, ch. 470, ou le Tobacco Marking Regulations, N.S. Reg. 51/91 ou une pratique administrative adoptée en vertu de ces textes sont-ils inconstitutionnels, inapplicables ou inopérants du fait: |
(a) indirect taxation; or
(b) inconsistent with s. 87 of the Indian Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-5; or
|
a) soit qu'ils constituent une imposition indirecte;
b) soit qu'ils sont incompatibles avec l'art. 87 de la Loi sur les Indiens, L.R.C. (1985), ch. I-5; |
(c) inconsistent with the Mi'kmaq Treaty of 1752, particularly Clause 4, which provides that Mi'kmaq "shall have free liberty to bring for Sale ... [any]thing they shall have to sell" and "liberty to dispose thereof to the best advantage"?
|
c) ou qu'ils sont incompatibles avec le Traité avec les Micmacs de 1752, plus particulièrement avec sa clause 4 qui prévoit que les Micmacs [traduction] «ont la liberté de vendre [. . .] tout ce qu'ils ont à vendre» et la «liberté d'en disposer à leur avantage»? |
|
|
1.2.1994
Before / Devant: SOPINKA J.
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file a notice of appeal
Her Majesty The Queen
v. (23876)
Darryl Gordon Park (Alta.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production de l'avis d'appel
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to February 11, 1994.
4.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file an intervener's factum
Bruce Douglas Branch et al.
v. (22978)
B.C. Securities Commission (B.C.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du mémoire d'un intervenant
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to January 24, 1994 nunc pro tunc.
4.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondents' factum
Rejean Gagnon
v. (23445)
Tina Lucas et al. (Ont.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du mémoire des intimés
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to February 8, 1994.
4.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to file a factum in its present form
Rejean Gagnon
v. (23445)
Tina Lucas et al. (Ont.) |
Requête en production du mémoire dans sa forme actuelle
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
4.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to file a factum in its present form
Her Majesty The Queen
v. (23253)
Native Women's Association of Canada et al. (F.C.A.)
|
Requête en production du mémoire dans sa forme actuelle
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
4.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file a response
Barrys Limited
v. (23877)
Fisherman, Food and Allied Workers' Union et al. (Nfld.)
|
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production d'une réponse
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
4.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER
Motion to adduce further evidence
Her Majesty The Queen
v. (23217)
Henry Johnson et al. (Ont.) |
Requête pour produire d'autres éléments de preuve
No one opposing the motion. |
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE and the appeal is adjourned to allow parties additional time to respond.
8.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the respondent's factum
Robert James S.
v. (23581)
Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du mémoire de l'intimé
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to February 3, 1994.
8.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to file a factum in its present form
Her Majesty The Queen in right of Canada et al.
v. (23361)
Reza (Ont.) |
Requête en production du mémoire dans sa forme actuelle
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
8.2.1994
Before / Devant: THE REGISTRAR
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file a respondent's factum
Rejean Gagnon
v. (23445)
Tina Lucas et al. (Ont.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du mémoire d'un intimé |
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to February 8, 1994.
NOTICES OF APPEAL FILED SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
AVIS D'APPEL PRODUITS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
27.1.1994
Her Majesty The Queen
v. (23978)
William John Dubazs (Alta.)
AS OF RIGHT
27.1.1994
Donald Lawrence Trotchie
v. (23987)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Sask.)
AS OF RIGHT
31.1.1994
Her Majesty The Queen
v. (23988)
John Michael Ferris (Alta.)
AS OF RIGHT
APPEALS HEARD SINCE LAST ISSUE AND DISPOSITION
|
APPELS ENTENDUS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION ET RÉSULTAT |
2.2.1994
CORAM: The Chief Justice Lamer and L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, McLachlin and Major JJ.
Alexander Lee Dickson
v. (23580)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Yuk.) |
Marcel La Flamme, for the appellant.
Judith Bowers, Q.C. and Robert Frater, for the respondent. |
|
|
THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally) -- This is an appeal as of right. We are all of the view that the trial judge erred in the admission or the use of the evidence of the previous sexual relationship between the complainant and the appellant and that, under the circumstances of this case, the order by the Court of Appeal for a new trial was properly made.
|
LE JUGE EN CHEF (oralement) -- Le présent pourvoi est formé de plein droit. Nous sommes tous d'avis que le juge du procès a commis une erreur en admettant ou en utilisant la preuve des rapports sexuels antérieurs entre la plaignante et l'appelant, et que, dans les circonstances de la présente affaire, c'est à bon droit que la Cour d'appel a rendu une ordonnance de nouveau procès. |
Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
|
En conséquence le pourvoi est rejeté. |
|
|
4.2.1994
CORAM: Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci et Major
Henri Daviault
c. (23435)
Sa Majesté La Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)
|
Giuseppe Battista, pour l'appelant.
Claude Provost, pour l'intimée. |
|
|
EN DÉLIBÉRÉ / RESERVED
Nature de la cause:
Droit criminel - Charte canadienne des droits et libertés - Preuve - Défense - Intention - Intoxication extrême - Agression sexuelle - Recevabilité - Infraction d'intention générale - Règle du précédent - Est-ce que la preuve d'une intoxication extrême provoquant l'absence de l'intention minimale requise pour une infraction d'intention générale est recevable en droit criminel canadien?
|
Nature of the case:
Criminal law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Evidence - Defence - Intent - Extreme intoxication - Sexual assault - Admissibility - General intent offence - Rule of precedent - Whether proof of extreme intoxication, causing absence of minimum intent required for general intent offence, admissible in Canadian criminal law. |
|
|
4.2.1994
CORAM: Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges La Forest, Sopinka, Iacobucci et Major
Viateur Richardson
c. (23413)
Sa Majesté La Reine (Crim.)(N.-B.)
|
Ronald Godin, pour l'appelant.
Graham J. Sleeth, c.r., pour l'intimée. |
|
|
LE JUGE EN CHEF (oralement) -- Nous sommes tous d'avis que, pour l'essentiel, les directives du juge au jury, quoique susceptibles de critiques, ont réussi à faire comprendre à ceux-ci les lois applicables, les faits pertinents, la théorie de la Couronne et de la défense de façon à nous permettre de conclure que l'accusé a eu un procès juste et équitable. C'est à tort que le juge a traité de l'article 231(3) comme s'il s'agissait d'une infraction autonome. Cependant, eu égard aux circonstances propres à l'espèce cette erreur est sans conséquence aucune et ne pouvait avoir aucun impact sur les délibérations des jurés.
|
THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally) -- We are all of the view that the judge's charge to the jury, although open to criticism, essentially succeeded in making clear to them the applicable law, the relevant facts, and the theory of the Crown and of the defence so that we can conclude that the accused had a fair and equitable trial. The judge erred in treating s. 231(3) as though it were an independent offence. In view of the particular circumstances of the case, however, this error is of no consequence and could not have had any impact on the jury's deliberations. |
Ce pourvoi de plein droit est donc rejeté.
|
This appeal as of right is accordingly dismissed. |
|
|
WEEKLY AGENDA |
ORDRE DU JOUR DE LA SEMAINE |
AGENDA for the week beginning February 14, 1994.
ORDRE DU JOUR pour la semaine commençant le 14 février 1994.
Date of Hearing/ Case Number and Name/
Date d'audition NO. Numéro et nom de la cause
The Court is not sitting this week
La Cour ne siège pas cette semaine
NOTE:
This agenda is subject to change. Hearing dates should be confirmed with Process Registry staff at (613) 996-8666.
Cet ordre du jour est sujet à modification. Les dates d'audience devraient être confirmées auprès du personnel du greffe au (613) 996-8666.
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 : March 7, 1994
Service : February 14, 1994 Filing : February 21, 1994 Respondent : February 28, 1994 |
Audience du : 7 mars 1994
Signification : 14 février 1994 Dépôt : 21 février 1994 Intimé : 28 février 1994 |
Motion day : May 2, 1994
Service : April 11, 1994 Filing : April 18, 1994 Respondent : April 25, 1994 |
Audience du : 2 mai 1994
Signification : 11 avril 1994 Dépôt : 18 avril 1994 Intimé : 25 avril 1994 |
Motion day : June 6, 1994
Service : May 16, 1994 Filing : May 23, 1994 Respondent : May 30, 1994
|
Audience du : 6 juin 1994
Signification : 16 mai 1994 Dépôt : 23 mai 1994 Intimé : 30 mai 1994 |
DEADLINES: APPEALS
|
DÉLAIS: APPELS |
The next session of the Supreme Court of Canada commences on April 25, 1994.
|
La prochaine session de la Cour suprême du Canada débute le 25 avril 1994. |
Pursuant to the Supreme Court Act and Rules, the following requirements for filing must be complied with before an appeal will be inscribed and set down for hearing:
|
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: |
Case on appeal must be filed within three months of the filing of the notice of appeal.
|
Le dossier d'appel doit être déposé dans les trois mois du dépôt de l'avis d'appel. |
Appellant's factum must be filed within five months of the filing of the notice of appeal.
|
Le mémoire de l'appelant doit être déposé dans les cinq mois du dépôt de l'avis d'appel. |
Respondent's factum must be filed within eight weeks of the date of service of the appellant's factum.
|
Le mémoire de l'intimé doit être déposé dans les huit semaines suivant la signification de celui de l'appelant. |
Intervener's factum must be filed within two weeks of the date of service of the respondent's factum.
|
Le mémoire de l'intervenant doit être déposé dans les deux semaines suivant la signification de celui de l'intimé. |
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
|
Le registraire inscrit l'appel pour audition après le dépôt du mémoire de l'intimé ou à l'expiration du délai de signification du mémoire de l'intimé. |
The Registrar shall enter on a list all appeals inscribed for hearing at the April 1994 Session on March 1, 1994.
|
Le 1 mars 1994, le registraire met au rôle de la session d'avril 1994 tous les appels inscrits pour audition. |
- 1 -
- 3 -
- 5 -
- 7 -
- 9 -
- 11 -
- 13 -
- 15 -
- 17 -
- 19 -
- 21 -
- 23 -
- 25 -
- 27 -
- 29 -
- 31 -
- 33 -
- 35 -