CONTENTS TABLE DES MATIÈRES
Applications for leave to appeal
159 Demandes d'autorisation d'appels
filed produites
Applications for leave submitted 160 - 169 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 170 - 177 Jugements rendus sur les demandes
leave d'autorisation
Motions 178 - 180 Requêtes
Notices of appeal filed since last
181 Avis d'appel produits depuis la dernière
issue
parution
Notices of intervention filed since 182 Avis d'intervention produits depuis la
last issue dernière parution
Notices of discontinuance filed since
183 Avis de désistement produits depuis la
last issue dernière parution
Appeals heard since last issue and 184 - 192 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
193 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 194 Délais: Requêtes devant la Cour
Deadlines: Appeals
195 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 |
Andrej Zabukovec
v. (23946)
Jozica Zabukovec (Ont.)
S. Steven Sands
Allan & Associates
FILING DATE 5.1.1994
Alberta Human Rights Commission et al.
Russell D. Albert
Laird Armstrong
v. (23951)
Co-operators General Insurance Co. (Alta.)
R.B. Davison, Q.C.
Parlee, McLaws
FILING DATE 10.1.1994
EBCO Industries Ltd.
Henry C. Wood
Epstein Wood & Co.
v. (23963)
ICAM Technologies Corp. et al. (B.C.)
D. Ross Clark
Davis & Co.
FILING DATE 18.1.1994
Dr. Richard H. Wade
David T. Hashey, Q.C.
Hanson, Hashey
v. (23964)
Paul Brewer (N.B.)
Grant M. Ogilvie
Atkinson & Atkinson
FILING DATE 18.1.1994
SDC Sterling Development Corp. et al.
Charles E. Beall
Gowling, Strathy & Henderson
v. (23897)
Gary Katz et al. (Ont.)
Lyon Gilbert
Gold, Gulliver
FILING DATE 10.1.1994
Réjeanne Brault
c. (23953)
Gérald Fontaine (Qué.)
DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.1.1994
Thalayasingam Sivakumar
v. (23962)
The Minister of Employment and Immigration (F.C.A.)(Ont.)
FILING DATE 27.1.1994
La Compagnie Minière Québec Cartier
c. (23960)
Les Métallurgistes Unis d'Amérique, Local 6869 (Qué.)
DATE DE PRODUCTION 27.1.1994
Gordon Edward Allan Waddell
Peter D. Ryan
v. (23925)
The United States of America (Crim.)(B.C.)
Kenneth Yule
Attorney General of Canada
FILING DATE 31.1.1994
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE SUBMITTED TO COURT SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
REQUÊTES SOUMISES À LA COUR DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
FEBRUARY 2, 1994 / LE 2 FÉVRIER 1994
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER AND CORY AND IACOBUCCI JJ. /
LE JUGE EN CHEF LAMER ET LES JUGES CORY ET IACOBUCCI
Randy Jorgensen and
913719 Ontario Limited
v. (23787)
Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Evidence - Obscenity - Pornography - Interpretation of s. 163 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge had not erred in her interpretation of the mens rea requirement of the offence under s. 163(2) of the Criminal Code -Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge had not erred in failing to find that reliance by the Applicants on the Ontario Film Review Board approval of the videotapes negated any element that the Applicants acted "knowingly" as required by the offence charged under s. 163(2) of the Criminal Code. - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge had not erred in failing to find that the Ontario Film Review Board approval amounted to a "lawful justification or excuse", the absence of which is required by the offence charged under s. 163(2) of the Criminal Code - Application of R. v. Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
August 20, 1992 Ontario Court (Provincial Division) (Newton P.C.J.) |
Conviction: 3 counts of selling obscene material without lawful justification or excuse contrary to s. 163(2)(a) of the Criminal Code |
October 19, 1993 Ontario Court of Appeal (Robins, Doherty and Austin JJ.A.) |
Appeal dismissed |
December 7, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Her Majesty the Queen
v. (23913)
Allan Peter Hawkins
- and -
Randy Jorgensen
- and -
Roman Ronish and George Ronish (Crim.)(Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Evidence - Obscenity - Application of s. 163 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 - Application of R. v. Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452 - Whether all material depicting adults engaged in sexually explicit consensual acts which are degrading or dehumanizing constitute obscenity - Whether material must also create substantial risk of harm to society - Whether the Applicant proved risk of harm beyond reasonable doubt - Whether depiction of sex outside context of emotional involvement not perceived by most members of community as substantially harmful.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
April 10, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (Misener J.) |
Respondent Hawkins acquitted on charges of unlawful distribution of obscene material, unlawful exposition of obscene material to the public and unlawful possession of obscene material contrary to s. 163 of the Criminal Code |
May 27, 1992 Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division) (Mitchell J.) |
Respondent Jorgensen found guilty of three counts of selling obscene materials and three counts of possession of obscene material for the purpose of sale contrary to s. 163(2)(a) |
January 7, 1993 Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division) (Cole J.) |
Respondents Ronish both acquitted on three counts of possessing obscene material for the purpose of sale and knowingly selling obscene material contrary to s. 163 |
October 19, 1993 Ontario Court of Appeal (Robins, Doherty and Austin JJ.A.) |
Applicant's appeals from the Respondents Hawkins and Ronish's acquittals dismissed; Respondent Jorgensen's appeal from conviction allowed and conviction set aside |
December 17, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Daniel Lewis Gyori
v. (23907)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Alta.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal law - Offences - Failing to provide breath samples - Right to counsel - Whether the Court of Appeal of Alberta erred in law in not upholding the conclusion of the Summary Conviction Appeal Court judge that the Applicant's right to counsel under section 10(b) of the Charter had been violated or infringed and that, pursuant to section 24(2) of the Charter, the evidence of the Applicant's refusal to take the breathalyser test was properly excluded from evidence.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
November 1, 1991 Provincial Court of Alberta (MacNaughton P.C.J.) |
Conviction: Failing to provide breath samples |
May 1, 1992 Court of Queen's Bench (Cawsey J.) |
Applicant's appeal allowed |
November 8, 1993 Court of Appeal of Alberta (McFadyen, Lieberman and Stratton JJ.A) |
Respondent's appeal allowed |
December 13, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Scott David Jones
v. (23916)
Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal law - Jurisdiction - Sentencing - Applicant making motion seeking relief under s. 24(1) of the Charter on a sentence appeal to the Court of Appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in declaring that it was not a court of competent jurisdiction within the meaning of the Charter - Whether the conduct of Crown counsel at the sentence hearing constituted a breach of the Applicant's constitutional rights.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
November 5, 1991 Supreme Court of British Columbia (Oliver J.) |
Conviction: 2 counts of robbery contrary to s. 344 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 |
September 16, 1993 Court of Appeal for British Columbia (McEachern C.J., Gibbs and Hinds JJ.A.) |
Appeal from sentence allowed; Application for relief under s. 24(1) of the Charter dismissed |
December 17, 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
Camille Huot
c. (23849)
Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Ont.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit criminel - Libertés publiques - Infractions - Preuve - Déclaration canadienne des droits et libertés - Preuve d'actes similaires - Crédibilité - Accusations d'attentats à la pudeur et de sodomie portées plus de 30 ans après les événements - La Cour d'appel de l'Ontario a t-elle erré en droit en décidant que l'article 148 du Code criminel de 1953-54 n'est pas contraire à l'alinéa 1b) de la Déclaration canadienne? - La Cour d'appel de l'Ontario a t-elle erré en droit en décidant que le juge du procès n'a pas imposé un fardeau plus lourd au demandeur en lui imposant de présenter une preuve d'expert à l'encontre de la vraisemblance de l'acte reproché?
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 22 juin 1992 Cour de justice de l'Ontario (Division générale) (Charron J.C.O.)
|
Culpabilité: Attentats à la pudeur et sodomie |
Le 8 novembre 1993 Cour d'appel de l'Ontario (Lacourcière [dissident], Arbour et Weiler, JJ.C.A.)
|
Appel rejeté |
Le 15 décembre 1993 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Avis d'appel de plein droit déposé |
Le 23 décembre 1993 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel déposée |
Jake Friesen
v. (23922)
Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(B.C.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation - Adventure or concern in the nature of trade -Inventory valuation - Whether the reasons for judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal contain an inherent inconsistency in that the Court has held that an inventory valuation can only be done for property that is the subject matter of an adventure or concern in the nature of trade in the year of disposition - Subsections 10(1) and 248(1) of the Income Tax Act, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
March 12, 1992 Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division (Rouleau J.) |
Applicant's appeal from the Minister of National Revenu's reassessment dismissed |
June 30, 1993 Federal Court of Appeal (Marceau, Linden and Létourneau, JJ.A.)
|
Applicant's appeal dismissed |
September 9, 1993 Federal Court of Appeal (Marceau, Linden and Létourneau, JJ.A.)
|
Applicant's motion for reconsideration dismissed |
December 23, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal and for an extension of time filed |
Lawrence O'Leary
v. (23928)
Her Majesty The Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick (N.B.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Administrative law - Jurisdiction - Action - Torts - Negligence - Damages - Labour law - Collective agreement - Labour relations - Master/Servant - Nature and extent of a Court's jurisdiction to entertain an action framed in tort when the claims asserted arise out of an employment relationship governed by a collective agreement which provides a procedure and forum for the enforcement of all differences between the parties thereto - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a claim alleged in tort, arising out of and relating to the performance of duties in an employment relationship which prescribes the statutory adjudication of all disputes relating to the collective agreement between the parties, does not constitute an adjudicable difference under that agreement, and clothes the Court with jurisdiction to hear the dispute.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
June 23, 1993 Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick, Trial Division, Small Claims (Stevenson J.)
|
Jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the Respondent's action in tort confirmed |
November 5, 1993 Court of Appeal of New Brunswick (Rice, Ryan and Turnbull, JJ.A.) |
Applicant's appeal dismissed |
December 30, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
715341 Ontario Ltd.
v. (23912)
The Minister of National Revenue (F.C.A.)(Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Labour law - Unemployment insurance - Statutes - Statutory instruments - Interpretation - Whether taxi drivers who lease their cars from the Applicant which is not a licensed taxi broker, but which has an arrangement with a licensed taxi broker, are in insurable employment within the meaning of s. 12(e) of the Unemployment Insurance Regulations - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in law in interpreting s. 12(e) and in holding that the taxi drivers are deemed to be in insurable employment under the said provision - Whether the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal contradicts its previous judgment in Attorney General of Canada v. Skyline Cabs (1982) Ltd. [1986] 5 W.W.R. 16.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
February 24, 1992 Tax Court of Canada (Teskey T.C.J.) |
Appeal dismissed |
October 20, 1993 Federal Court of Appeal (Heald, Linden and Holland JJ.A.) |
Application for judicial review dismissed |
December 17, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal filed |
Carole L. Barrons
v. (23853)
Hyundai Auto Canada Inc ("Hyundai Canada") (Ont.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Civil rights - Civil procedure - Actions - Contracts - Costs - Is Charter offended when either the courts or the rules of court do not compensate for the fact that a layperson does not have the specialized knowledge of law and procedures that a lawyer has? - Should Applicant's claim have been judged on the basis of its validity as opposed to the Applicant's drafting skills?
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
August 31, 1992 Ontario Court (General Division) (Lovekin J.) |
Statement of claim against Respondent struck out |
March 8, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Austin J.A.) |
Respondent's motion for dismissal of appeal denied |
October 7, 1993 Court of Appeal for Ontario (Galligan, Arbour and Labrosse JJ.A) |
Applicant's appeal dismissed |
November 17, 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
André Tousignant
c. (23955)
Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Charte canadienne des droits et libertés - Droit criminel - Procédure - Appel - Compétence - Police - Détention arbitraire - Juge du procès écartant une preuve en vertu de l'art. 24(2) de la Charte au motif que le policier n'avait pas de motifs raisonnables et probables de croire à la commission d'une infraction criminelle, tel que l'exige l'art. 254(3) du Code criminel - La Cour d'appel a-t-elle excédé sa juridiction en renversant l'acquittement du demandeur sur le deuxième chef de refus de test et en révisant pour ce faire une question de faits qui aurait dû être laissée à l'appréciation du juge du procès?
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 5 avril 1991 Cour du Québec, chambre criminelle (Cloutier j.c.q.) |
Acquittement: conduite avec facultés affaiblies et refus de subir le test d'ivressomètre |
Le 29 novembre 1991 Cour supérieure, chambre criminelle (Jourdain j.c.s.) |
Appel rejeté |
Le 12 novembre 1993 Cour d'appel du Québec (Tourigny, Baudouin et Proulx jj.c.a.) |
Pourvoi rejeté sur le premier chef d'accusation et accueilli sur le deuxième chef d'accusation |
Le 11 janvier 1994 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel déposée |
Pierre André Gaulin
v. (23874)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(Qué.)
NATURE OF THE CASE
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Criminal Law - Offences - Food and drugs - Procedural law - Amendments - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the Applicant was entitled to a fair and trial - Whether the trial judge erred in law in permitting amendments to seven counts some 12 months after the trial, while the case was taken under advisement - Whether the Applicant was deprived of his right to be heard on his cross-appeal before Landry S.C.J.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
December 20, 1990 Court of Quebec (Roberge Q.C.J.) |
Respondent's amendment to replace the word "drug" by the word "food" granted |
December 20, 1990 Court of Quebec (Roberge Q.C.J.) |
Conviction: 4 counts of advertising and selling a food contrary to s. 3 of the Food and Drug Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27 Acquittal: 12 counts relating to advertising and selling a food contrary to the Act and other specific drug regulations |
June 7, 1991 Superior of Quebec (Landry S.C.J.) |
Respondent's appeal allowed as to counts 8 to 16 relating to other specific drug regulations and new trial ordered Applicant's cross-appeal dismissed |
October 3, 1991 Court of Appeal of Quebec (Nichols J.A.) |
Applicant's application for leave to appeal allowed in part |
September 27, 1993 Court of Appeal of Quebec (Rothman, Mailhot and Proulx, JJ.A.) |
Applicant's appeal dismissed |
November 29, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for leave to appeal file |
December 29, 1993 Supreme Court of Canada |
Application for an extension of time and for filing a lengthy memorandum of arguments |
Jean Boileau
c. (23942)
Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Charte canadienne des droits et libertés - Droit criminel - Droit à l'assistance d'un avocat - Aide juridique et avocat de garde - La Cour d'appel a-t-elle erré en droit en statuant que l'arrêt majoritaire de la Cour suprême dans R. c. Brydges, [1990] 1 R.C.S. 190, ne fait pas obligation aux policiers d'informer les justiciables, dans tous les cas d'arrestation ou de détention, de l'existence selon le cas de régimes d'avocats de garde et/ou d'aide juridique lorsque ceux-ci existent?
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 27 juin 1991 Cour du Québec Chambre criminelle et pénale (Matte j.c.q.) |
Demandeur reconnu coupable de conduite d'un véhicule avec un taux d'alcoolémie supérieur à .08 |
Le 9 janvier 1992 Cour supérieure du Québec (Gomery j.c.s.)
|
Appel rejeté |
Le 22 décembre 1993 Cour d'appel du Québec (Rothman, Mailhot et Deschamps jj.c.a.) |
Appel rejeté |
Le 7 janvier 1994 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel déposée |
Claude Maheu
c. (23873)
Ministère du revenu national (C.A.F.)(Qué.)
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Charte canadienne des droits et libertés - Procédure - Procédure civile - Demande de contrôle judiciaire devant la Cour d'appel fédérale - Requête pour cesser d'occuper présentée par le procureur du demandeur accordée - Rejet de la demande de contrôle judiciaire au motif que le demandeur n'a pas obtempéré à l'ordonnance de la Cour le priant de justifier son retard à déposer son dossier - La Cour d'appel fédérale a-t-elle erré en rejetant le recours du demandeur en raison de son refus de se conformer aux règles de pratique de la Cour fédérale?
HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL
Le 17 juin 1992 Cour canadienne de l'impôt (Tremblay j.c.c.i.)
|
Appel à l'encontre de la décision de l'intimé rejeté |
Le 17 septembre 1993 Cour d'appel fédérale (Isaac j.c., Hugessen et Décary jj.c.a.)
|
Demande de contrôle judiciaire rejetée |
Le 1er décembre 1993 Cour suprême du Canada
|
Demande d'autorisation d'appel et requête en prorogation de délai déposées |
JUDGMENTS ON APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE |
JUGEMENTS RENDUS SUR LES DEMANDES D'AUTORISATION |
FEBRUARY 3, 1994 / LE 3 FÉVRIER 1994
23754 RONALD TIMPSON v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.) (F.C.A.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, 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
Taxation - Statutes - Assessment - Appeal - Interpretation - Deduction of farming losses where chief source of income is not farming - Construction of s. 31(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148, as amended - William Moldovan v. Her Majesty The Queen, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 480, considered.
23821 WILFRED LEONARD NICHOLSON v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Alta.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for extension of time is granted. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée. La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Sexual offenses - Applicant and complainant engaged in custody battle over their daughter - Applicant cross-examined on amicus curiae report - Whether the trial judge erred in allowing the Applicant to be cross-examined on the contents of the report of the amicus curiae - was such error corrected by the trial judge's instruction to the jury to ignore the report?
23726 NATIONAL PARTY OF CANADA, MEL HURTIG and MEL HURTIG on behalf of the members of the NATIONAL PARTY OF CANADA v. CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION (Alta.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, 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
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Administrative law - Broadcasting - Whether the Respondent is subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in relation to a decision to exclude the Applicant party from participation in the leaders debates on national television - If so, is the decision to so exclude the Applicant contrary to the guarantees expressed in ss. 2(b), 3 and 15 of the Charter.
23844 JOSEPH FRIEDMAN c. LE SOUS-MINISTRE DU REVENU DU QUÉBEC (Qué.)
CORAM: Le Juge en chef et les juges L'Heureux-Dubé et McLachlin
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit fiscal - Procédure - Appel - Compétence - Preuve - Traitement fiscal d'une commission touchée par un agent d'assurance sur une police d'assurance-vie achetée pour son compte - La Cour d'appel a-t-elle erré en droit en rendant un jugement dont le dispositif n'en supporte pas la conclusion? - L'opinion de la Cour d'appel à l'effet que le juge de première instance a erré en droit quant aux conséquences juridiques qu'il a tirées des faits permet-elle à celle-ci de modifier cette même détermination des faits? - En matière fiscale, le fardeau de preuve repose-t-il sur les épaules d'un contribuable à toutes les étapes et face à toute nouvelle prétention invoquée par le cotisant?
23818 TERRIE'S PLUMBING & HEATING LTD., JOHN MELLING and DONALD McCAIN and GROVESNOR FINE FURNITURE (1982) Ltd. (Sask.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Torts - Negligence - Insurance - Damages - Evidence - Respondent awarded judgment for damages to its premises and stock by soot escaping from the furnace room while the Applicants were cleaning the boiler - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in accepting the evidence of the Respondent's insurers as to the monies paid to the Respondent under a policy of insurance as being the appropriate quantum of the damages to which the Respondent was entitled - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge's award, although based on an error in law concerning the concept of subrogation and on evidence tendered pursuant to the trial judge's error of law, was nonetheless sustainable in that the award was not "inordinately high" or "wholly erroneous" - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to consider the Respondent's successful mitigation of its losses through the resale of the damaged goods in assessing the quantum of damages to which the Respondent is entitled.
23814 PEACE VALLEY RANCH LIMITED v. COCONUT GROVE MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT CORP., THE HELMSLEY MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT CORP., 767648 ONTARIO LIMITED, and 630662 ONTARIO LIMITED (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Commercial law - Mortgages - Interest - Application of s. 8 of the Interest Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-18 to clause in mortgages requiring three months' notice of payment or a bonus in lieu thereof following default on the mortgages - Applicability of s. 16 of the Mortgages Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.40 - Whether the clause contained in the mortgage requiring three months' notice of payment or a bonus in lieu thereof following default on the mortgage applies when default occurred not during the term of the mortgage, but at maturity - Whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted s. 8 of the Interest Act - Whether the requirement to pay a bonus equal to three months interest pursuant to the same clause when there is default on maturity is a fine or penalty prohibited by s. 8(1) of the Interest Act - Whether s. 16 of the Mortgages Act applies when default occurs on maturity - Whether s. 8(1) of the Interest Act is paramount legislation pursuant to the Constitution Act, 1867 that has the effect of making s. 16 of the Mortgages Act ultra vires the legislative powers of the Province of Ontario.
23827 MASTERCRAFT PROPERTIES LIMITED, MEGA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and SEPAM LIMITED carrying on business as the CONSERVATORY PARTNERSHIP v. EL EF INVESTMENTS INC. (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, 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
Commercial law - Mortgages - Interest - Application of s. 8 of the Interest Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-18 with respect to a mortgage covenant requiring three months' notice of payment or a bonus in lieu thereof following default on the mortgage - Applicability of s. 16 of the Mortgages Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.40 - Does the covenant apply when default occurs either during the term of the mortgage or at maturity as it would when a mortgagor wishes to prepay the mortgage? - Is the requirement to pay a bonus equal to three month's interest pursuant to a covenant, when there is a default on maturity, a fine or penalty prohibited by s. 8(1) of the Interest Act? - Does s. 16 of the Mortgages Act apply when default occurs on maturity of the mortgage? - Is s. 8 of the Interest Act paramount legislation pursuant to the Constitution Act, 1867, which has the effect of making s. 16 of the Mortgages Act ultra vires the legislative powers of the Province of Ontario?
23885 ERIC RALPH BIDDLE v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Ont.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, 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 - Evidence - Eye-witness identification evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that the charge to the jury was legally sufficient to guard against the risk of conviction based on eye-witness identification evidence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that the verdict of the jury was not unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence and in applying the wrong test and taking into account the failure of the Applicant to testify in the determination of that issue.
23756 RODGER BELL - v.- REGINA (B.C.)
CORAM: The Chief Justice, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for extension of time is granted. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée. La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Constitutional law - Criminal law - Municipal law - Statutes - Municipal corporations - Statutory instruments - By-laws - Statutory authority - Whether the municipality exceeded its powers under Section 932 of the Municipal Act, (1979) R.S.B.C. c. 290, in designating every pit-bull terrier or other type of pit-bull as a "vicious dog" which has to be muzzled in public, without regard to its actual character or propensity.
23665 DESMOND HAUGHTON v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: La Forest, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal is granted on the issue of the applicability to this case of s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46.
La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel est accordée sur la question de savoir si le sous-al. 686(1)b)iii) du Code criminel, L.R.C. (1985), ch. C-46, s'applique à la présente affaire.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Offenses - Charge to the jury - Applicant convicted of second degree murder - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the failure of the trial judge to leave the lesser offence of manslaughter to the jury on two discrete grounds did not cause a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice to the Applicant at his trial.
23718 TERRY LEE PHILIP HYNES v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (N.S.)
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka and Major JJ.
The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Procedural law - Trial - Evidence - Sentencing - Applicant sentenced to seven year term under offence of attempted armed robbery - Order under s. 741.2 of the Criminal Code that Applicant not eligible for parole until he has served one-half of the term - Whether the trial judge erred in not finding evidence of diminished responsibility - Whether the Applicant's rights under ss. 7, 10(b) and 11(d) of the Charter were violated when he was denied Legal Aid to appeal - Whether the Applicant's rights under ss. 11(d) and 15 of the Charter were violated when the trial judge referred to facts conducted at a previous preliminary hearing on other charges - Whether the Applicant's rights under s. 11(d) and 15 of the Charter were violated when the trial judge stated that the Applicant should be sentenced as if he had committed a robbery - Whether the sentence imposed was a heavy sentence for a first time conviction on such an offence -Whether the trial judge erred in finding that the gun was loaded - Whether the trial judge erred in not letting the Applicant speak before passing sentence.
23769 CARLO RIZZO and 460561 ONTARIO LTD. v. HANOVER INSURANCE CO. (Ont.)
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
Procedural law - Insurance - Evidence - Defence - Applicant's restaurant burning and Applicant acquitted on charges of arson - Respondent refusing to pay Applicant's insurance claim - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the defence of arson may be proved by an insurer in civil cases without the necessity of demonstrating the Applicant's exclusive opportunity - If proof of exclusive opportunity is not an indispensable requirement of proof of arson in civil cases where evidence of opportunity is accompanied by other inculpatory evidence, whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Applicant's simple possession of a key constitutes evidence of opportunity - If a defence of arson may succeed in the absence of proof of exclusive opportunity and if the Applicant's simple possession of a key constitutes evidence of opportunity, whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that, where there is some evidence of motive and opportunity, arson may be proved without any evidence connecting the Applicant with the setting of the fire.
23720 ONTARIO TEACHERS' PENSION PLAN BOARD v. CAROLYN HUGH, MARILYN BOLTON and DOROTHY KINSMAN (Ont.)
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
Labour law - Pensions - Judicial review - Legislation - Interpretation - Respondents' requests for credit in the Teachers' Superannuation Fund denied by the Teachers' Superannuation Commission - Ontario Court of Justice, General Division, allowing Respondents' application for judicial review - Whether a pension board or commission ought to be viewed as sufficiently "expert" to warrant curial deference - Standard of judicial review in the case of an expert pension tribunal deciding an issue within its area of expertise in the absence of both a privative clause and a statutory right of appeal.
23668 LAL MOHAMMED ZURMATI v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.) (Ont.)
CORAM: L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier and McLachlin JJ.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
NATURE OF THE CASE
Criminal law - Procedural law - Trial - Evidence - Applicant convicted of sexual assault - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that the trial judge's instruction to the jury that the Applicant obviously had an interest in the outcome of the trial and they would have to consider this in weighing his evidence was not an error of law - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that any prejudicial effect of the instruction was ameliorated by the references in the charge to the presumption of innocence and the onus of proof.
23825 VILLE DE SEPT-ILES c. CLAUDETTE LUSSIER (Qué.)
CORAM: Les juges L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et McLachlin
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée avec dépens.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Procédure - Droit municipal - Procédure civile - Législation - Interprétation - Prescription -Code civil - Pouvoir de taxation des municipalités et des commissions scolaires - Immeubles cédés à l'intimée en paiement suite à avis de défaut de payer des taxes municipales et scolaires - Jugement rendu par la Cour municipale contre l'ancien propriétaire en faveur de la demanderesse pour arrérages de taxes - Intimée payant arrérages de taxes sur un immeuble pour le vendre libre de tout privilège et hypothèque -Action en répétition de l'indu de l'intimée accueillie en partie par la Cour supérieure du Québec - Est-ce que le jugement de la Cour municipale en faveur de la demanderesse a interrompu la prescription de trente ans de sa créance? - La demanderesse était-elle justifiée de réclamer les arrérages de taxes de l'ancien propriétaire et de l'intimée selon l'art. 498 de la Loi sur les cités et villes? - La convention entre l'ancien propriétaire et l'intimée a-t-elle éteint le privilège immobilier avec droit de suite de la demanderesse selon l'art. 498 de la Loi sur les cités et villes?
23847 ROBERT CORMIER c. SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE (Crim.) (Qué.)
CORAM: Les juges L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier et McLachlin
La demande d'autorisation d'appel est rejetée.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
NATURE DE LA CAUSE
Droit criminel - Défense - Preuve - Procès - Jury - Défense d'intoxication volontaire - Contre-preuve - Preuve de faits similaires - Directives au jury - La défense d'intoxication volontaire en droit criminel canadien porte-t-elle sur la capacité de l'accusé de former une intention coupable, ou plutôt sur l'existence réelle de cette intention coupable? À quelles conditions une Cour d'appel, surtout saisie d'une cause de meurtre, doit-elle reconvoquer les parties lorsqu'elle fonde sa décision sur des considérations non discutées à l'audience, notamment sur des jugements rendus depuis?
23855 EDWARD ANTHONY HORAN v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Crim.)(Ont.)
CORAM: L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier and McLachlin 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 - Statutes - Interpretation - Evidence - Police - Whether the Courts erred in their definition of the phrase reasonable grounds for arrest and the tests to be imposed where the peace officer deciding to make the arrest is the witness to those alleged reasonable grounds for arrest pursuant to s. 495(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 - Whether the Courts erred in proscribing the rights of the Applicant to adduce evidence which would test the reasonableness of the officer's arrest, contrary to s. 7 of the Charter.
MOTIONS |
REQUÊTES |
26.1.1994
Before / Devant: L'HEUREUX-DUBÉ J.
Motion for an order that the portion of the Record of the proceedings in the Court of Appeal identified as "Private" shall be sealed and not form part of the public record
Peter Edwards
v. (23932)
The Solicitor General of Ontario et al. (Ont.) |
Requête en vue d'obtenir une ordonnance enjoignant de sceller la partie du dossier de la Cour d'appel décrite comme "privée" et de ne pas l'inclure dans le dossier public
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE
26.1.1994
Before / Devant: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LAMER
Motion for an order to abridge and set the time frames for filing case on appeal and factums and setting the date for hearing of this appeal
United Steelworkers of America, Local 9332 et al.
v. (23621)
Gerald J. Phillips et al. (N.S.) |
Requête visant à obtenir une ordonnance réduisant et établissant les délais applicables au dépôt du dossier et des mémoires, et fixant la date de l'audition du présent pourvoi
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE The following is ordered:
IT IS ORDERED THAT the motion to abridge and set the times for filing the case on appeal and the factums for this appeal and to set the date for hearing this appeal is granted;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Appellants shall file the case on appeal and their factums on or before March 10, 1994;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Respondents shall file their factums on or before May 5, 1994;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the hearing of this appeal shall be held on May 24, 1994.
26.1.1994
Before / Devant: LE REGISTRAIRE
Requête en prorogation du délai de production du mémoire des intimés
Jacques Bilodeau et al.
c. (23095)
Roland Boutin et al. (Qué.)
|
Motion to extend the time in which to file the respondents' factum
|
|
|
ACCORDÉE / GRANTED Délai prorogé au 28 février 1994.
27.1.1994
Before / Devant: L'HEUREUX-DUBÉ J.
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file an application for leave
Donald Gordon Butchart
v. (23956)
Her Majesty The Queen (Ont.) |
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production d'une demande d'autorisation
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to January 21, 1994.
27.1.1994
Before / Devant: LE REGISTRAIRE
Requête en prorogation du délai de signification et de production du mémoire d'un intervenant
Le Comité paritaire de l'Industrie de la Chemise
c. (23083)
Jonathan Potash (Qué.)
|
Motion to extend the time in which to serve and file the factum of an intervener
|
|
|
GRANTED / ACCORDÉE Time extended to January 24, 1994, nunc pro tunc.
28.1.1994
Before / Devant: LE REGISTRAIRE
Requête en prorogation du délai pour produire une réponse
Claude Maheu
c. (23873)
Ministère du Revenu national (C.A.F.)
|
Motion to extend the time in which to file a response
|
|
|
ACCORDÉE / GRANTED Délai prorogé au 24 janvier 1994.
NOTICES OF APPEAL FILED SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
AVIS D'APPEL PRODUITS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
17.1.1994
Terrance Wayne Burlingham
v. (23966)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)
AS OF RIGHT
2.2.1994
Her Majesty The Queen
v. (23876)
Darryl Gordon Park (Crim.)(Alta.)
AS OF RIGHT
NOTICES OF INTERVENTION FILED SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
AVIS D'INTERVENTION PRODUITS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
BY/PAR: Yukon Status of Women Council
IN/DANS: Yukon Human Rights Commission et al.
v. (23584)
Yukon Order of Pioneers et al. (Yuk.)
NOTICES OF DISCONTINUANCE FILED SINCE LAST ISSUE
|
AVIS DE DÉSISTEMENT PRODUITS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION |
2.2.1994
Gordon Edward Allan Waddell
v. (23925)
The United States of America (Crim.)(B.C.)
(appeal)
APPEALS HEARD SINCE LAST ISSUE AND DISPOSITION
|
APPELS ENTENDUS DEPUIS LA DERNIÈRE PARUTION ET RÉSULTAT |
26.1.1994
CORAM: The Chief Justice Lamer and La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
Amanda Louise Thomson
v. (23794)
Paul Thomson (Man.) |
Martin G. Tadman, for the appellant.
Jack A. King and Holly D. Penner, for the respondent.
Graham Garton, Q.C. and Louise Lussier, for the intervener the A.G. of Canada.
Joan A. MacPhail, for the intervener the A.G. of Manitoba.
Robert H. Ratcliffe and Elizabeth Bucci, for the intervener the A.G. of Ontario. |
|
|
THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally) -- The appeal is dismissed on the undertaking made to the Court by respondent through his counsel. Counsel will deposit with the Registrar no later than tomorrow at noon a signed undertaking in the terms before the Court. Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dubé would have agreed with Madame Justice Helper's disposition of the case in reference to the undertaking.
Reasons and determination as to costs to follow.
|
LE JUGE EN CHEF (oralement) -- Le pourvoi est rejeté sous réserve de l'engagement que l'intimé a pris devant notre Cour par l'intermédiaire de son avocat. L'avocat déposera auprès du Registraire, demain midi au plus tard, un engagement signé selon les termes proposés à la Cour. Le juge L'Heureux-Dubé aurait été d'accord avec la façon dont le juge Helper a tranché l'affaire par rapport à l'engagement.
Les motifs et la décision quant aux dépens suivront. |
|
|
27.1.1994
CORAM: Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci et Major
Le Comité paritaire de l'industrie de la chemise et al.
c. (23083)
Jonathan Potash et Sélection Milton (Qué.)
|
Michelle Lefrançois, pour l'appelant le Comité paritaire de l'industrie de la chemise.
Monique Rousseau et Gilles Laporte, pour l'appelant le procureur général du Québec.
Leah Price, for the intervener the A.G. of Ontario.
Robert C. Maybank, for the intervener the A.G. of Alberta.
Tom Irvine, for the intervener the A.G. of Saskatchewan.
François Beauvais et Diane Fortier, pour l'intervenante l'Assoc. des Comités paritaires du Québec Inc.
Jean Dagenais, Avrum P. Orenstein et Suzanne Orenstein, pour les intimés. |
|
|
LE JUGE EN CHEF (oralement)-- La Cour, se prononcant séance tenante, accueille le pourvoi, infirme le jugement de la Cour d'appel et rétablit le jugement rendu par la Cour supérieure de juridiction criminelle. Le tout avec dépens contre les intimés. Les questions constitutionnelles reçoivent les réponses suivantes:
|
THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally) -- The Court forthwith allows the appeal, sets aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and restores the judgment rendered by the Superior Court of criminal jurisdiction, the whole with costs against the respondents. The constitutional questions are answered as follows: |
1. Les dispositions du par. 22e) de la Loi sur les décrets de convention collective, L.R.Q., ch. D-2, qui accordent des pouvoirs d'inspection, sont-elles incompatibles avec l'art. 8 de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés?
Non. |
1. Are the provisions of s. 22(e) of An Act respecting Collective Agreement Decrees, R.S.Q., c. D-2, which confer powers of inspection inconsistent with s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
No. |
2. Dans l'hypothèse où la Cour répondrait par l'affirmative à la première question, ces dispositions peuvent-elles se justifier dans le cadre de l'article premier de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés?
|
2. If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative, are these provisions justified pursuant to s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? |
Vu la réponse à la première question la deuxième question ne se soulève pas.
Motifs à suivre.
|
In view of the answer to the first question, the second question does not arise.
Reasons to follow. |
|
|
28.1.1994
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and Iacobucci JJ.
Gregory William Pittman
v. (23436)
Her Majesty The Queen (Crim.)(N.S.) |
Alan F. Nicholson and Patricia Fricker, for the appellant.
Dana Giovannetti, for the respondent. |
|
|
LA FOREST J. (orally for the Court) -- We need not hear from you Mr. Giovannetti. The Court is prepared to render judgment now. Justice Sopinka will read the judgment of the Court.
|
LE JUGE LA FOREST (oralement au nom de la Cour) -- Il ne sera pas nécessaire de vous entendre Me Giovannetti. Le Cour est prête à rendre jugement séance tenante, lequel sera lu par le juge Sopinka. |
SOPINKA J. -- This is an appeal as of right. The basis of the dissent of Jones J.A. in the Court of Appeal is whether a warning pursuant to Vetrovec v. The Queen, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 811, was appropriate in the circumstances of this case. This does not raise a question of law although failure to give a warning in some circumstances may constitute a miscarriage of justice. The appellant, therefore, does not have an appeal as of right to this Court.
|
LE JUGE SOPINKA -- Le présent pourvoi est formé de plein droit. La dissidence du juge Jones de la Cour d'appel repose sur la question de savoir si, dans les circonstances de la présente affaire, il était approprié de faire une mise en garde conformément à l'arrêt Vetrovec c. La Reine, [1982] 1 R.C.S. 811. Cela ne soulève pas une question de droit même si l'omission de faire une mise en garde dans certaines circonstances peut constituer une erreur judiciaire. L'appelant ne peut donc se pourvoir de plein droit devant notre Cour. |
Having heard the appellant on the merits, however, we are of the view that, even if the Court had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, we would dismiss it. In the circumstances of this case, failure to give a Vetrovec warning to the jury did not result in a miscarriage of justice.
|
Après avoir entendu l'appelant sur le fond, nous sommes toutefois d'avis que, même si notre Cour avait compétence pour entendre le pourvoi, nous le rejetterions. Dans les circonstances de la présente affaire, l'omission de faire au jury une mise en garde de type Vetrovec ne s'est pas soldée par une erreur judiciaire. |
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. |
Le pourvoi est donc rejeté. |
|
|
31.1.1994
CORAM: The Chief Justice Lamer and La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union et al.
v. (23306)
Her Majesty The Queen (B.C.) |
P. Nicholas Glass and Mari A. Worfolk, for the appellants.
Eric A. Bowie, Q.C. and Meg Kinnear, for the respondent. |
THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally for the Court) -- We are ready to hand down judgment now. Justice La Forest will pronounce the judgment of the Court.
|
LE JUGE EN CHEF (oralement au nom de la Cour)-- La Cour est prête à rendre jugement séance tenante, lequel sera lu par le juge La Forest. |
LA FOREST J. -- We are all of the view that the thrust of the reasoning applicable to s. 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms adopted in earlier decisions of this Court to determine the scope of freedom of association as it related to the right of union members to strike applies as well to the determination of the right to liberty under s. 7 for the same purpose. This approach completely defeats the general argument of the appellant for holding the Act as a whole invalid under s. 7.
|
LE JUGE LA FOREST -- Nous sommes tous d'avis que l'effet du raisonnement applicable à l'al. 2d) de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, qui a été adopté dans des arrêts antérieurs de notre Cour, pour établir les limites de la liberté d'association, dans la mesure où elle est reliée au droit des syndiqués de faire la grève, est le même quand il s'agit d'établir les limites du droit à la liberté en vertu de l'art. 7 à la même fin. Ce point de vue va complètement à l'encontre de l'argument général que l'appelant avance pour conclure que la Loi est, dans l'ensemble, invalide en vertu de l'art. 7. |
So far as the specific argument that the penalty attached to the refusal to return to work is concerned, that prohibition is intended to enforce the regulatory scheme, and must be read in that context. It is not an absolute offence, but a strict liability offence. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs throughout.
|
Quant à l'argument précis selon lequel la peine était liée au refus de retourner au travail, cette interdiction a pour objet de mettre à exécution le régime de réglementation et doit être interprétée dans ce contexte. Il s'agit non pas d'une infraction de responsabilité absolue, mais d'une infraction de responsabilité stricte. Le pourvoi est donc rejeté avec dépens dans toutes les cours. |
31.1.1994
CORAM: La Forest, Sopinka, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
Edda Emilie Zeitel et al.
v. (22792)
Susan Diane Ellscheid, et al. (Ont.) |
Peter J. Harte, for the appellants.
Michael Anne MacDonald, for the respondents. |
RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ
Nature of the case:
Municipal law - Taxation - Assessment - Sale - Statutes - Tax sale - Municipal Tax Sales Act, 1984, S.O. 1984, c. 48 - Erroneous tax assessment - Registered owner of island, believing it to be a different, unimproved island, defaulting on municipal taxes - Island actually improved and occupied by neighbours with possessory title - Neighbours having registered title to unimproved island, but paying taxes as if improved - Municipality offering island occupied by neighbours for sale, also believing it to be unimproved - Whether tax sale should be declared void - Whether provisions of the Municipal Tax Sales Act, 1984, supra, protect the tax deed from attack - Whether rules of equity apply.
|
Nature de la cause:
Droit municipal — Taxation — Évaluation — Vente — Lois — Vente pour impôts impayés — Loi de 1984 sur les ventes pour impôts municipaux 1984, S.O. ch. 48 — Cotisation erronée — Le propriétaire d'une île, croyant qu'il s'agissait d'une île différente, non améliorée, a omis de payer les impôts municipaux — En fait l'île était améliorée et occupée par des voisins qui avaient un titre possessoire — Les voisins avaient un titre enregistré sur l'île non améliorée, mais payaient des impôts comme si elle était améliorée — La municipalité a mis en vente l'île occupée par les voisins, croyant également qu'elle n'était pas améliorée — La vente pour impôts impayés doit-elle être déclarée nulle? — Les dispositions de Loi de 1984 sur les ventes pour impôts municipaux, précitée, protègent-elles l'acte de vente pour impôts impayés? — Les règles d'equity sont-elles applicables? |
|
|
1.2.1994
CORAM: Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci et Major
Le Syndicat de l'enseignement de Champlain et al.
c. (23188)
La Commission scolaire régionale de Chambly (Qué.)
|
Georges Marceau et Michel Boyer, pour les appelants.
Béatrice Vizkelety, pour l'intervenante la Commission des droits de la personne.
Pierre Bégin et Christian Brunelle, pour l'intimée. |
|
|
EN DÉLIBÉRÉ / RESERVED
Nature de la cause:
Droit du travail - Arbitrage - Convention collective - Relations de travail - Contrôle judiciaire - Brefs de prérogative - Compétence - Interprétation - Législation - Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, L.R.Q., 1977, ch. C-12 - Liberté de religion - Discrimination par suite d'un effet préjudiciable - Mesures d'accommodement.
|
Nature of the case:
Labour law - Arbitration - Collective agreement - Labour relations - Judicial review - Prerogative writs - Jurisdiction - Interpretation - Legislation - Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, R.S.Q. 1977, c. C-12 - Freedom of religion - Discrimination by prejudicial effect -Accommodation measures. |
|
|
1.2.1994
CORAM: Le juge en chef Lamer et les juges L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci et Major
Willmor Discount Corporation
c. (23220)
Ville de Vaudreuil (Qué.)
|
Sandor J. Klein, pour l'appelante.
Pierre Le Page et Louise Comtois, pour l'intimée. |
|
|
EN DÉLIBÉRÉ / RESERVED
Nature de la cause:
Code civil — Droit municipal — Municipalités — Droit fiscal — Droit des biens — Biens immeubles — Vente — Recours — Enrichissement sans cause — Répétition de l'indu — Immeubles appartenant à l'appelante vendus à l'enchère pour non-paiement de taxes — Acquisition par la Ville et vente à un tiers — Règlement en vertu duquel les taxes ont été imposées déclaré inopérant et, par conséquent, vente à l'enchère déclarée inopérante — Étant propriétaire, l'appelante a-t-elle droit de recevoir le produit de la vente? — L'appelante a-t-elle droit de recevoir le produit de la vente de son bien en application de l'une ou l'autre des doctrines de la répétition de l'indu, de la remise en état ou de l'enrichissement sans cause?
|
Nature of the case:
Civil Code - Municipal law - Municipal corporations - Taxation - Property law - Real property - Sale -Remedies - Unjust enrichment - Répétition de l'indu - Immoveables belonging to the Appellant sold at auction for non-payment of taxes - City acquiring the immoveables and selling them to a third party - By-law pursuant to which the taxes had been assessed declared null and void and, in consequence, sale at auction of the immoveables declared null and void - Whether, by virtue of its ownership, the Appellant is entitled to receive the proceeds of the sale of its property - Whether the Appellant is entitled to receive the proceeds of the sale of its property by the application of the institution of répétition de l'indu or the institution of remise en état or the institution of unjustified enrichment. |
|
|
2.2.1994
CORAM: La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
H. Boris Antosko
v. (23282)
Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(N.B.)
and between
Stanley F. Trzop
v. (23283 / 284)
Her Majesty The Queen (F.C.A.)(N.B.)
|
Eugene J. Mockler, Q.C., for the appellants.
Donald G. Gibson and Josée Tremblay, for the respondent. |
RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ
|
|
Nature of the case:
Taxation - Assessment - Statutes - Interpretation - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of s. 20(14) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148, as amended.
|
Nature de la cause:
Droit fiscal - Cotisation - Lois - Interprétation - La Cour d'appel fédérale a-t-elle commis une erreur lorsqu'elle a interprété et appliqué le par. 20(14) de la Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu, S.R.C. 1952, ch. 148, et modifications? |
|
|
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. |
|
|
3.2.1994
CORAM: La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.
Peat Marwick Thorne Inc., Trustee of the Estate of Arden Anthony Marzetti, a Bankrupt
v. (23273)
Director of Maintenance Enforcement et al. (Alta.)
|
Michael J. McCabe, for the appellant.
Rick T.G. Reeson, for the intervener the Superintendent of Bankruptcy.
Jeanette Fedorak, for the respondent the Director of Maintenance Enforcement.
Ingrid C. Hutton, Q.C. and Robert Moen, for the respondent the Attorney Genernal of Canada. |
RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ
|
|
Nature of the case:
Commercial law - Taxation - Statutes - Bankruptcy - Interpretation - Bankrupt not paying monthly child and spousal support to Petitioner - Bankrupt ordered to make payments to Director of Maintenance Enforcement - Bankrupt filing for bankruptcy and executing "Agreement Letter" assigning "post-bankruptcy" tax refund to his Trustee - Garnishment Summons issued and income tax refund paid to Director - Master of Bankruptcy of Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta ordering that refund be given to Trustee - Court of Queen's Bench allowing Petitioner's appeal - Court of Appeal for Alberta dismissing Bankrupt's appeal - Whether an income tax refund is a debt owed by the Crown to the taxpayer - Whether a "post-bankruptcy" income tax refund is "property" within the meaning of s. 67(c) of the Bankruptcy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 - Whether a Garnishee Summons issued after bankruptcy to a Director of Maintenance Enforcement takes priority over the claim of a Trustee in Bankruptcy with respect to an assignment of a "post-bankruptcy" tax return to the Trustee - Whether s. 67(d) of the Bankruptcy Act expands the concept of property which is divisible among creditors as contained in s. 67(c) of the Act - Whether the assignment of an income tax refund to a trustee constitutes an assignment under "any other Act of Parliament" of s. 67 of the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11.
|
Nature de la cause:
Droit commercial - Impôt - Lois- Faillite - Interprétation - Non-paiement par le failli des aliments aux enfants et à la conjointe -Failli enjoint de faire les paiements au directeur de l'exécution des ordonnances et ententes alimentaires - Déclaration de faillite et signature, par le failli, d'une «lettre d'entente» cédant à son syndic le remboursement d'impôt après-faillite - Remboursement versé au directeur en application d'un bref de saisie-arrêt - Ordonnance du protonotaire de la Cour du Banc de la Reine de l'Alberta, siégeant en faillite, enjoignant la remise du remboursement au syndic - Appel de la requérante accueilli par la Cour du Banc de la Reine - Rejet de l'appel du failli par la Cour d'appel de l'Alberta - Un remboursement d'impôt sur le revenu est-il une dette de la Couronne envers le contribuable? - Un remboursement d'impôt après-faillite est-il un bien au sens de l'al. 67c) de la Loi sur la faillite, L.R.C. (1985), ch. B-3? - Un bref de saisie-arrêt délivré après la faillite au directeur de l'exécution des ordonnances ou ententes alimentaires a-t-il priorité sur la réclamation d'un syndic de faillite fondée sur une cession en sa faveur d'un remboursement d'impôt après-faillite? - L'alinéa 67d) de la Loi sur la faillite élargit-il la notion de bien qui peut être partagé entre les créanciers, énoncée à l'al. 67c) de la Loi? - La cession d'un remboursement d'impôt à un syndic constitue-t-elle une cession en vertu de «toute autre loi fédérale» au sens de l'art. 67 de la Loi sur la gestion des finances publiques, L.R.C. (1985), ch. F-11? |
|
|
WEEKLY AGENDA |
ORDRE DU JOUR DE LA SEMAINE |
AGENDA for the week beginning February 7, 1994.
ORDRE DU JOUR pour la semaine commençant le 7 février 1994.
Date of Hearing/ Case Number and Name/
Date d'audition NO. Numéro et nom de la cause
07/02/94 9:30 MOTION - REQUÊTE
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 -
- 37 -
- 39 -
- 41 -
- 43 -
- 45 -