Bulletins

      OF CANADA                                             DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

May 7, 2004 760 - 787 Le 7 mai 2004

CONTENTS                                                                    TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Helena Clement, et autre

Serge Saint-Jean

c. (30264)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qc)

Pierre Roy

Justice Canada - Unité Mixte - Produits de la criminalité

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 8.4.2004

Janssen-Ortho Inc.

John Terry

Torys

v. (30202)

The Minister of Health, et al. (F.C.)

Frederick B. Woyiwada

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE: 13.4.2004

V. (Q.V.)

Graham T. Clark

v. (30271)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

Alison Hurst

Attorney General of Ontario

FILING DATE: 13.4.2004

Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Academic Staff Association

Ritu Khullar

Chivers, Carpenter

v. (30284)

Board of Governors of the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (Alta.)

Robert B. White, Q.C.

Davis & Company

FILING DATE: 15.4.2004

Kyu-Bom Hahn

Kyu-Bom Hahn

v. (30232)

Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.)

Monika A. Lozinska

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE: 16.3.2004

Placements Mane Ltée

Jacques Lapointe

c. (30288)

Ville de Beaupré (Qc)

Sandra Bilodeau

Pothier, Delisle

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 5.4.2004

Her Majesty the Queen

Anne-Marie Lévesque

Attorney General of Canada

v. (30290)

Canada Trustco Mortgage Company (F.C.)

Al Meghji

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt

FILING DATE: 13.4.2004

Robert Murrin

Robert Murrin

c. (30294)

Le Procureur général du Québec, et autres (Qc)

Lizann Demers

Bernard, Roy & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 15.4.2004

Paul Martineau

Paul Martineau

c. (30296)

Sous-Ministre du revenu du Québec (Qc)

Michel Morel

Veillette & Associés

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 16.4.2004

Leroy Latty, et al.

Edward L. Greenspan, Q.C.

Greenspan, White

v. (30295)

The United States of America (Ont.)

Beverly J. Wilton

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE: 16.4.2004

Canadian Photonic Labs, et autres

Robert Bélanger

c. (30291)

Simbol Test Systems Inc. (Qc)

Pierre McMartin

Beaudry, Bertrand

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 19.4.2004

9117-4912 Québec Inc., et autres

Donald Duperré

c. (30212)

Les Immeubles Dandurand Inc. (Qc)

Martin Filion

Plante, Filion

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 16.4.2004

The Honourable Robert H. Nelson Founder President of Public Defenders for himself and as representative of all those also improperly denied benefits

Robert H. Nelson

v. (30297)

Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Right Honorable Paul Martin (F.C.)

Robert Carvalho

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE: 20.4.2004

John Susin

John Susin

v. (30298)

Baker and Baker, et al. (Ont.)

Alfred J. Esterbauer

Koskie Minsky

FILING DATE: 20.4.2004

Phillip Ofume, et al.

Phillip C. Ofume

v. (30289)

CIBC Mortgage Corporation, a body corporate (N.S.)

John A. Keith

Cox Hanson, O’Reilly, Matheson

FILING DATE: 26.4.2004

Francine Bourdon, et autres

Claude Tardif

Rivest, Schmidt

c. (30299)

Stelco Inc. (Qc)

Chantal Masse

McCarthy Tétrault

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 30.4.2004

Eleanor Iness

Raj Anand

WeirFoulds

v. (30292)

Canada Mortgage and Housing corporation, et al. (Ont.)

John A. Campion

Fasken, Martineau, DuMoulin

FILING DATE: 30.4.2004

MAY 3, 2004 / LE 3 MAI 2004

                                                    CORAM:  Chief Justice McLachlin and Major and Fish JJ.

                                                          La juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Major et Fish

Shawna Prebushewski

v. (30189)

Dodge City Auto (1984) Ltd. and Chrysler Canada Ltd. (Sask.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Procedural Law - Interpretation - Costs - Under consumer protection legislation, what obligations does a manufacturer owe to a consumer once it has discovered a defect in this product and once contacted by same in respect to a defect in a product it has sold? - What type of conduct on the part of the manufacturer will attract exemplary damages? - When should costs be awarded against a consumer who brings an action under The Consumer Protection Act, S.S. 1996, c. C-30?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Paul W. Cummings

v. (30221)

Ruta Cummings individually and as Executrix and Trustee of the Estate of Bruce Norman Cummings, deceased (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Wills and Estates - Dependant’s relief - Testator leaving most of estate to his surviving spouse -  Testator also creating trust for the support of two adult dependant children - One child suffering from degenerative disease - Adequacy of provision - Whether Court should establish criteria to address the claim of dependants suffering from a serious illness disability in the face of competing claims of surviving spouse - Whether Court of Appeal erred in considering that deceased had legal obligations toward his surviving spouse which would have mandated an equalization of net family properties - Whether Court of Appeal should have considered the means of the surviving spouse - Whether Court of Appeal’s approach suggests that spousal status  is a determinant of significant entitlement, without reference to demonstrable need and- Meaning to be accorded  a “first charge” for support obligations against a deceased’s estate, as provided for in a domestic contract - Whether appellate court has the power and duty to review the circumstances and reach its own conclusions in dependants’ relief case - Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 26

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                  CORAM:  Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

                                                                       Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

James Thomas Johnston

v. (30142)

College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick (N.B.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law - Judicial review - Complaint regarding Applicant’s competency to practice safe medicine - College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick suspend Applicant’s medical license - Request for Applicant to undergo psychiatric assessment - License suspended until such assessment - Can the Respondent College refuse to obey their own Regulation Number Eleven and refuse notice to applicant who refuses a psychiatric exam pursuant to R Section 58.7(i) and or 58.7(ii) of Medical Act of New Brunswick - Can Respondent College refuse applicant Audit Alterem Partems - Can Respondent College deny the applicant natural justice.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Ville de Trois‐Rivières

c. (30225)

Réginald Caumartin, Marie B. Caumartin, Lyne Caumartin et Jean M. Caumartin (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit municipal - Responsabilité civile - Dommages-intérêts - Refoulement d’égouts - Effet rétroactif d’un règlement - Code de plomberie du Québec - Loi sur les cités et villes - Le règlement 12 s’applique-t-il aux immeubles des intimés quoique construits avant l’entrée en vigueur de ce règlement?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Maria Sokolowska

v. (30198)

Ottawa Police Services (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Judgments and orders - Summary judgment - Property law - Sheriff’s notice to vacate - Whether individuals who are municipal employees may be held liable for their criminal actions, as ordinary citizens are - Whether summary judgment may be used by an adverse entity as means of evading responsibility for destruction it causes and costs it produces.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                             CORAM:  Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

                                                                  Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

La Municipalité d’Austin

c. (30185)

Les Dix Capitaines inc., Pierre La Rochelle, Claude Vachon et Procureur général du Canada

- et entre -

Procureur général du Québec

c. (30185)

Les Dix Capitaines inc., Pierre La Rochelle, Claude Vachon et Procureur général du Canada

- et entre -

Association de préservation de la Baie Verte et Pierre G. Rioux

c. (30185)

Les Dix Capitaines inc., Pierre La Rochelle, Claude Vachon et Procureur général du Canada (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit constitutionnel - Droit maritime - Droit municipal - Partage des compétences - Navigation - Nuisances - Caractère véritable du règlement municipal dont la validité constitutionnelle est contestée - Quelle est l’étendue des chefs de compétence législative prévus aux paragraphes 92(8) , (13)  et (16)  de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867  en regard des nuisances commises par des plaisanciers ou des campeurs lacustres sur un lac situé sur le territoire d’une province?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

G.S.

c. (30238)

G.G. (ès qualités de tutrice à l’enfant mineure M.M.G.) (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit de la famille - Filiation - Preuve - Le droit des particuliers à la dignité et à l’intégrité physique est-il mieux protégé lors d’une procédure criminelle que lors d’une procédure civile ? - La disparité entre les lois des provinces sur l’obligation de subir une analyse par prélèvement de substance corporelle pour établir une empreinte génétique lors d’une procédure relative à la filiation crée-t-elle une discrimination envers le demandeur dépendant de la localité géographique où il se situe au Canada ? - Le droit à l’intégrité physique du demandeur a-t-il été violé par l’émission d’une ordonnance de se soumettre à une analyse de prélèvement d’une substance corporelle sur sa personne et ce, malgré une preuve contraire établissant l’impossibilité physique de conception de l’enfant par le demandeur et malgré qu’il y ait eu fabrication de preuve de la part de l’intimée ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

MAY 6, 2004 / LE 6 MAI 2004

30000                    Canada Safeway Limited v. Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, Connie Starzynski, Alice Mae Baker, Jim Sczembora, Lynn Mckay, Loretta Zutz, Dennis Epp, Fay Elizabeth Clarke, Frances A. Bitz, Linda Mewhort, Dawn Dixon, Janet Shaigec, Annette Galavan, Marisha Matkowski, Felicia Graziano and Selma Dromerski and United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 401 - and between - United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 401 v. Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, Connie Starzynski, Alice Mae Baker, Jim Sczembora, Lynn Mckay, Loretta Zutz, Dennis Epp, Fay Elizabeth Clarke, Frances A. Bitz, Linda Mewhort, Dawn Dixon, Janet Shaigec, Annette Galavan, Marisha Matkowski, Felicia Graziano and Selma Dromerski, Canada Safeway Limited (Alta.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The applications for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Edmonton), Numbers 0103‐0035‐AC and 0103‐0040‐AC, dated August 13, 2003, are dismissed with costs.

 Les demandes d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Alberta (Edmonton), numéros 0103‐0035‐AC et 0103‐0040‐AC, daté du 13 août 2003, sont rejetées avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour Law - Duty to Accommodate - Buyout Provisions - Compensation - Collective Agreement - Labour Relations - Employer renegotiates collective agreement with union and includes a buyout provision from which disabled employees are excluded - All employees except a group of disabled employees given buyouts - Employer refuses to accommodate - Union does not offer to accommodate and does not canvasses its membership regarding whether it should accommodate - Whether buy‐out plan akin to seniority or compensation provisions or  a third type of provision - Appropriate comparator group for assessing whether there has been discrimination - Whether an “hours worked” requirement is rationally connected to the purpose of reducing labour costs in an employer buy‐out plan - What employment related benefits must be offered to non‐working employees - When will eligibility rules restricting access to such benefits to working employee constitute unlawful discrimination - Liability of union for a collective agreement provision with discriminatory effect - Relevance of negotiating history and union’s unsuccessful seeking of a non‐discriminatory provision in collective bargaining - Whether the principle that the employer is expected to initiate the accommodation process has been undermined - Whether jurisprudence unsettled as to what is required of a union to discharge its duty to accommodate when the employer refuses to accommodate - What constitutes undue hardship for unions - How to apportion liability if unions liable with employers for a collective agreement provision with discriminatory effect.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30062                    Abram Thiessen v. Columbia Shuswap Regional District (B.C.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA030318, dated September 26, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA030318, daté du 26 septembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Did the courts below err in law in failing to define and apply the standard of care owed by the Respondent as the owner of a workplace, to the Applicant, a non‐worker at the workplace, by s. 119 of the Workers Compensation Act,  R.S.B.C. 1996 c. 492? -  Does that standard become the standard required by the Occupiers Liability Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 337 by operation of s. 3(4) thereof in these circumstances -  Did the Respondent meet that standard of care owed to the Applicant - Contributory negligence - What are the criteria for the admission of the reports of experts.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30084                    Norman E. Bower, Charles Bradbury, John Bunn, Robert James Cornfield, George Forster, Karl V. Gallicano, Michael Georgetti, Jean L. Heusdens, Henry A. Hopp, Jack Howlett, Albert King, Ralph Langevin, Maxime Lepine, Norman Lucht, John McGowan, James Petterson, Elmer Pontius, Laurier Regnier, Marcus Smith, Florayanet Venturini, William Edward Walsh, Altert Warrington and Thomas Watmough, each on his own behalf and together on behalf of and representing all other beneficiaries, of the Pension Plan established January 1, 1926 by the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada Limited, which Plan became known as the "Pension Fund" of The Pension Fund Society of the Consolidated Mining Smelting Company of Canada Limited now named the Cominco Pension Fund Coordinating Society v. Cominco Ltd., Cominco Pension Fund Society and Cominco Pension Fund Coordinating Society (B.C.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA026722, dated October 8, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA026722, daté du 8 octobre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Trusts and trustees  - Pension plans - Surplus - Merger of pension plans -  Entitlement to surplus in defined benefit pension plan - Employer transferring pension plan surplus to new pension plans - Whether  principle that trust funds must be administered for the sole benefit of the trust beneficiaries applies to pension plan in the absence of an express term which specifically devotes the corpus of the trust to the exclusive use of the beneficiaries - Whether power to amend the pension plan permitted company to use surplus to meet the its liabilities in ongoing plans, through the merger of the closed pension plan with the ongoing plans - Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding that trust principles required that where company’s ongoing plans had assumed the pension liabilities of the closed plan, all of the trust assets of the closed plan had to be transferred to the ongoing plans and charged with all of the liabilities of the ongoing plans - Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the assumption of the pension plan liabilities by company’s ongoing plans, in exchange for the transfer to those ongoing plans of assets matching the value of those liabilities, did not crystallize any entitlement to the surplus remaining in the pension plan trust fund.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30111                    Tracey Ferguson v. John Lush (B.C.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA29701, dated November 3, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA29701, daté du 3 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Damages - Procedural Law - Courts - Whether the appellate court erred in accepting an inconsistent jury verdict which granted past and future pecuniary losses of $58,500 and non pecuniary damages of $1,500.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30119                    Lafontaine‐Rish Medical Group Ltd. and Sonia Lafontaine v. Marta Erdelyi (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C35689, dated November 10, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C35689, daté du 10 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Trial - Appeal - Evidence - Fresh evidence - Expert evidence - Applicants seeking to introduce fresh evidence to undermine  expert’s trial testimony - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law regarding the introduction of fresh evidence relating to the disciplinary history of the Respondent’s expert witness - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law implicitly on the general issue of the introduction of expert witness evidence - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law implicitly on the general issue of the obligation of counsel in introducing expert witness evidence in relation to the professional disciplinary history of such witness - Whether Court of Appeal erred in law implicitly on the general issue and application of concealment of impugned, illegal, criminal and fraudulent conduct by an expert witness.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30120                    Warren Hitzig, Alison Myrden, Mary‐Lynne Chamney, Catherine Devries, Jari Dvorak, Stephen Van de Kemp, Deborah Anne Stultz‐Giffin and Marco Renda v. Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C39532, dated October 7, 2003, is dismissed without costs.

 La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C39532, daté du 7 octobre 2003, est rejetée sans dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Criminal - Criminal Law - Remedies - Whether the court should have retained a supervisory role in its constitutional remedy - Whether severing provisions from the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations was the appropriate remedy for constitutional defects - Whether the case should have been remitted to the motions judge to ensure that new exemption scheme resulting from the Court of Appeal’s order would adequately address the needs of seriously ill Canadians?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30132                    American Wollastonite Mining Corp. formerly known as White Plains Resources Corp. v. Frank E. Scott and Fraser Milner, a Partnership (B.C.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA030011, dated November 19, 2003, is dismissed with costs to the respondent Fraser Milner.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA030011, daté du 19 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de l'intimée Fraser Milner.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law -Torts - Negligence - Causation - Company law - Securities - Directors - Breach of fiduciary duty - Breach of contract - Value of consideration given for transferred shares - Claim of professional negligence against company’s solicitors.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30140                    Moosomin Credit Union v. Royal Bank of Canada (Sask.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan, Number C.A. No. 416, dated November 25, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Saskatchewan, numéro C.A. No. 416, daté du 25 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Bankruptcy - Security Interests - Priorities - Section 427 Bank Act loan - Bank having security agreement including after acquired property - Credit Union subsequently entering into security agreement with debtor for purchase of a truck - Debtor making assignment in bankruptcy - Whether Bank or Credit Union entitled to proceeds of sale of truck - Whether there are common law and equitable exceptions to the priority of s. 427 Bank Act security - Whether the interest of a secured lender providing purchase money financing is sufficiently similar to the interest of a conditional sales vendor, thus entitling the secured lender to a similar common law priority exception - Whether it is reasonable to place lenders that are unable to obtain s. 427  Bank Act security at a commercial disadvantage

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30147                    Sydney Abrahams, Frank Bartelen, Dorie Franz Bartelen, Nicholas Bartolomucci, Jack D. Beaton, Kai Yee Chow, Yiu Kee Chow, Alan Ying Tsi Chung, Ping Mei Chung, Nick Cianci, Mila Cueva, Brigida M. Cueva, Frank Gentile, Millie Gentile, Nicholas Gray, Robert James Hart, Dale S. Humphey, Girdhari L. Patodia, Robert Lee, Shu Wha Lee, John Arthur Lewis, Kenneth Sawatzky, Yusuf Abdulgani Shaikh, Leonard Schechtman, Beverley Schechtman, Donald Acria Tsuji, Gary Akikazu Tsuji, Elaine Starr, Ronald E. Starr, also known as Ron E. Starr, Paul Sachimi Tokiwa, Marten Vanderbroek and Linda Vanvendbroek v. Bank of Montreal (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C38267, dated November 20, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C38267, daté du 20 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Bills of exchange - Promissory note - Holder in due course - Bank taking assignment of alleged promissory notes  - Whether Range v. Belvedere [1969] S.C.R. applies to real estate transactions - whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to correctly apply the decision in Range to the facts of this case - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in  concluding that this case was factually distinguishable from Range - Whether the Applicants were entitled not to have their “promissory notes” read independently of their purchase contract documentation - Whether, given the total failure of consideration, the “notes” were simply evidence of debt capable of assignment to the Respondent, only subject to the equities existing between the original parties.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30163                    Bahadur Singh Bhalru v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (Vancouver), Number CA030584, dated November 28, 2003, is dismissed.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Colombie‐Britannique (Vancouver), numéro CA030584, daté du 28 novembre 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Unreasonable Verdict - Hearsay - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by upholding the learned trial judge’s verdict of guilt in circumstances where such verdict was unreasonable and cannot be supported by the evidence or was a miscarriage of justice - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by upholding the learned trial judge’s decision to first admit, and then rely upon, a prior written statement given a year after the incident for the truth of its contents.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30193                    Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc., Merck Frosst Canada & Co., Syngenta Limited, Astrazeneca UK Limited and Astrazeneca Canada Inc. (FC) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    McLachlin C.J. and Major and Fish JJ.

 The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐108‐03, dated December 22, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel fédérale, numéro A‐108‐03, daté du 22 décembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

THIS FILE HAS BEEN SEALED / CE DOSSIER EST SCELLÉ

30065                    UL Canada Inc. v. Attorney General of Quebec and Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec (Que.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐008256‐992, dated October 1, 2003, is granted with costs to the applicant in any event of the cause.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐008256‐992, daté du 1 octobre 2003, est accordée avec dépens en faveur de la demanderesse quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Constitutional law - International law - Statutes - Interpretation - Civil rights - Freedom of expression - Division of powers - Provincial power to maker regulations to protect the dairy industry against competitors - Obligation to exercise delegated powers in accordance with international and interprovincial agreements - Whether s. 40(1)(c) of the Regulation respecting dairy products and substitutes, R.R.Q. 1981, c. P-30, r. 15, by imposing restrictions on the colour of margarine exposed, sold and distributed in the Province of Quebec, is ultra vires the powers of the Government of Quebec in light of the North American free trade Agreement, the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization and the Agreement on internal trade - Whether the impugned Regulation violates the guarantee of freedom of expression - Whether the Superior Courts have jurisdiction to declare legislation invalid due to unreasonableness - Whether the lower courts erred in finding that the impugned Regulation had incidental effects on international and internal trade.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30103                    Lafferty, Harwood & Partners Ltd. and The Estate of Richard Lafferty v. Jacques Parizeau and Lucien Bouchard (Que.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐009510‐009, dated October 24, 2003, is granted with costs to the applicants in any event of the cause.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐009510‐009, daté du 24 octobre 2003, est accordée avec dépens en faveur des demanderesses quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Civil law - Civil liability - Defamation - Freedom of expression - Right to safeguard of one’s reputation - Whether the lower courts erred in determining that the defamatory comments constituted a fault - Whether the lower courts erred in assessing the moral and punitive damages.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30104                    Adil Charkaoui c. Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'Immigration et Solliciteur général du Canada (C.F.) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel fédérale, numéro A‐349‐03, daté du 31 octobre 2003, est rejetée.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐349‐03, dated October 31, 2003, is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit de l’immigration - Résident permanent - Interdiction de territoire - Détention - Motifs raisonnables de croire que le résident permanent constitue un danger pour la sécurité nationale ou la sécurité d’autrui, ou qu’il se soustraira vraisemblablement à la procédure ou au renvoi - Contrôle judiciaire des motifs justifiant le maintien de la détention - Droit d’appel à l’encontre de l’ordonnance de maintien en détention - Art. 80(3) , 82  et 83  de la Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés  (ch. 27 des Lois du Canada de 2001) - Les jugements attaqués sont-ils entachés d’erreurs de droit ? - Les jugements attaqués en appel ont-ils été rendu en ignorant les droits du demandeur prévus aux articles 7 , 11  et 15  de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés  (Partie I, 1982, c. 11 (R.U) L.R.C. App. II no. 44) ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30116                    Ferme Geléry Inc. c. La municipalité de Laverlochère et Monique Rivest, ès qualités de secrétaire‐trésorière de la municiaplité de Laverlochère (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Québec), numéro 200‐09‐003883‐029, daté du 5 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Quebec), Number 200‐09‐003883‐029, dated November 5, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

 Droit municipal – Législation – Textes réglementaires – Interprétation – Le règlement relatif au plan d’implantation et d’intégration architecturale de la municipalité intimée est-il ultra vires ou inopérant? – Le règlement est-il inconciliable avec la Loi sur la protection du territoire et des activités agricoles, L.R.Q., ch. P-41.1?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

30143                    Dominique Briand c. Sa Majesté la Reine (Qc) (Criminelle) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Québec), numéro 200‐10‐001234‐017, daté du 20 novembre 2003, est rejetée.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Quebec), Number 200‐10‐001234‐017, dated November 20, 2003, is dismissed.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Procédure - Preuve - Conflit d’intérêts en matière criminelle - Admissibilité - Témoigne d’expert - La communication privilégiée «avocat-client» qui vient à la connaissance d’une tierce partie en raison d’une indiscrétion ou d’un manquement déontologique de l’avocat de l’accusé et sans le consentement et la participation de ce dernier est-elle admissible en preuve ? - Le Ministère public peut-il, à des fins judiciaires, informer et / ou mettre en présence un expert de la teneur d’une telle communication ? - Tout tribunal, que ce soit en vertu de la common law ou de la Charte , a-t-il juridiction pour interdire l’utilisation, la propagation et l’admissibilité d’une telle communication, autant lors du procès qu’à l’occasion des procédures préalables au procès ? - Lorsqu’un accusé allègue le conflit d’intérêts à l’encontre de son procureur, est-il dans l’obligation, sur la question «d’impact négatif», de démontrer, en appel, que ce dernier a agit de façon déraisonnable et que le verdict aurait été autre, c’est-à-dire rencontrer les critères qui sont applicables lorsqu’on soulève l’incompétence de l’avocat? - Si ce n’est pas le cas, quels sont les critères applicables, en pratique, pour déterminer s’il y a «impact négatif»? - Est-ce qu’un alibi inexact et préjudiciable obtenu en contravention de l’article 10b)  de la Charte  est admissible en preuve, par l’entremise de la troisième étape de l’arrêt Stillman, du fait que la poursuite dispose de témoins oculaires qui placent l’accusé sur la scène du crime ? - Est-ce que l’arrêt Stillman laisse subsister la distinction, faites dans Collins et Black, entre la déclaration auto-incriminante obtenue en violation de l’article 10b)  de la Charte  et les autres éléments de preuve traditionnellement qualifiés de matériels ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30171                    Isidore Garon Ltée c. Syndicat du bois ouvré de la région de Québec inc. (C.S.D.) (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Québec), numéro 200‐09‐003505‐010, daté du 9 décembre 2003, est accordée avec dépens en faveur de la demanderesse quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Quebec), Number 200‐09‐003505‐010, dated December 9, 2003, is granted with costs to the applicant in any event of the cause.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Arbitrage - Droit administratif - Compétence - Les art. 2091 et 2092 du Code civil du Québec, L.Q. 1991, ch. 64, qui consacrent, entre autres, le droit du salarié de réclamer un délai de congé raisonnable ou une indemnité en tenant lieu, sont-ils applicables à des salariés régis par une convention collective de travail conclue sous l’égide du Code du travail, L.R.Q., ch. C-27? - L’arrêt Parry Sound (district), Conseil d’administration des services sociaux  c. S.E.E.F.P.O., section locale 324, [2003] 2 R.C.S. 157, a-t-il pour effet d’incorporer les art. 2091 et 2092 dans toute convention collective et de conférer ainsi à l’arbitre la compétence pour se saisir d’une réclamation fondée sur ces articles?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30172                    Fillion et Frères (1976) inc. c. Syndicat national des employés de garage du Québec inc. (C.S.D.) (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Québec), numéro 200‐09‐003550‐016, daté du 9 décembre 2003, est accordée avec dépens en faveur de la demanderesse quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Quebec), Number 200‐09‐003550‐016, dated December 9, 2003, is granted with costs to the applicant in any event of the cause.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit du travail - Arbitrage - Droit administratif - Compétence - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en appliquant l’arrêt Parry Sound (district), Conseil d’administration des services sociaux c. S.E.E.F.P.O., section locale 324, [2003] 2 R.C.S. 157, au présent dossier? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en appliquant les art. 2091 et 2092 du Code civil du Québec, L.Q. 1991, ch. 64, alors que le droit des parties est régi par une convention collective de travail? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en ne distinguant pas le corpus législatif examiné à l’arrêt Parry Sound, du contexte législatif prévalant dans la province de Québec ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

26.4.2004

Before / Devant : FISH J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the Attorney General of British Columbia for an order extending the time to apply for leave to intervene and for leave to intervene in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion for an extension of time to apply for leave to intervene and for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Attorney General of British Columbia, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

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

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

Pursuant to Rule 59(1)(a) the intervener shall pay to the appellant and respondent any additional disbursements occasioned to the appellant and respondent by their intervention.

26.4.2004

Before / Devant :

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the applicant for an order extending the time to perfect the application for leave to appeal until five (5) days after the date on which the Court of Appeal for Ontario issues and enters the order;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion for an order extending the time to perfect the applicant’s application for leave to appeal until five (5) days after the date on which the Court of Appeal for Ontario issues and enters the order, is granted.

27.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR 

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to April 21, 2004.

23.4.2004

Before / Devant : FISH J.

UPON APPLICATION by the Attorney General for Saskatchewan for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the order of March 10, 2004;

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said intervener is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding fifteen (15) minutes at the hearing of the appeal.

29.4.2004

Before / Devant : IACOBUCCI J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to June 18, 2004 for the interveners Attorney General of Manitoba and Attorney General of British Columbia and to June 25 for the interveners Attorney General of Quebec and Attorney General of Ontario.

30.4.2004

Before / Devant : IACOBUCCI J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Délai prorogé au 24 mars 2004.

30.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE CHIEF JUSTICE

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

L’ORDONNANCE SUIVANTE EST RENDUE:

L’appel prévu pour le 21 mai 2004 est ajourné à la session de l’automne 2004.

30.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR 

DISMISSED WITHOUT COSTS / REJETÉE SANS DÉPENS

26.4.2004

Government of Saskatchewan

v. (29973)

Rothmans Benson & Hedges Inc. (Sask.)

29.4.2004

Daniel Ménard

c. (30089)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qc)

30.4.2004

Sa Majesté la Reine

c. (30108)

G.R. (Qc)

30.4.2004

Christopher Carter, et autre

c. (30060)

Louise Glegg

- et entre -

Smith & Nephew Inc.

c. (30060)

Louise Glegg (Qc)

30.4.2004

Sameer Mapara

v. (29750)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

22.4.2004

Eifion Wyn Roberts

v. (30282)

Her Majesty the Queen (Alta.)

(As of Right)

26.4.2004

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (29376)

Kenneth Roy Hurrell (Ont.)

(Appeal)

                                                                               SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

                                                                                     CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

                                                                                                           - 2003 -

        04-07-2002

                                                                                                           - 2004 -