Bulletins

      OF CANADA                                             DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

March 12, 2004 415 - 432                                                                    Le 12 mars 2004

CONTENTS                                                      TABLE DES MATIÈRES

Stephen Fazekas

Stephen Fazekas

v. (30121)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

John Norris

Attorney General of Ontario

FILING DATE: 29.12.2003

Osvaldo Minchella

David E. Harris

v. (30014)

Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)

David Littlefield

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE: 25.2.2004

Shawna Prebushewski

Ronald J. Balacko

Rusnak, Balacko, Kachur & Rusnak

v. (30189)

Dodge City Auto (1984) Ltd., et al. (Sask.)

Kenneth A. Ready, Q.C.

McDougall, Gauley

FILING DATE: 26.2.2004

Pharmascience Inc., et autre

Guy Du Pont

Davies, Ward, Phillips & Vineberg

c. (30188)

Jocelyn Binet, et autre (Qc)

Philippe Frère

Lavery, de Billy

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 26.2.2004

Greater Vancouver Water District

Guy E. McDannold

Staples, McDannold, Stewart

v. (30190)

Graham Industrial Services Ltd. (B.C.)

Christopher J. O’Connor

Borden, Ladner, Gervais

FILING DATE: 27.2.2004

Kevin James Millership

Kevin James Millership

v. (30197)

Her Majesty the Queen, in Right of the Attorney General of Canada, et al. (B.C.)

Sean Gaudet

A.G. of Canada

FILING DATE: 3.3.2004

MARCH 8, 2004 / LE 8 MARS 2004

                                                    CORAM:  Chief Justice McLachlin and Major and Fish JJ.

                                                          La juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Major et Fish

Elliott Neal Pawliuk Brito, an infant by his Guardian Ad Litem, Rosemary Pawliuk, and Rosemary Pawliuk

v. (29967)

Harold Ewart Woolley and Shelley Ross (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Physicians and surgeons - Informed consent - Duty to inform - Plaintiff bringing action for damages against doctors, nurses and hospital after second twin suffered brain injury at birth - Appropriate scope of disclosure in the law of informed consent - Whether plaintiff must prove the specific risk arose or merely that the medical procedure would have been avoided had proper disclosure occurred.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Melville Hunt, Marion M. Hunt

v. (30026)

TD Securities Inc. c.o.b. as TD Evergreen, TD Financial Services and Mark Schram (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Securities - Stockbrokers - Fiduciary duty - Sale of shares - Whether an independent doctrine of good faith in the performance of a contract arises in a financial advisory relationship as an implied term of the contract or in equity - Whether duty of care in negligence gives rise to an independent doctrine of good faith in a financial advisory relationship   -  Whether judicial recognition should be given to a tort of good faith - Whether the appellate court’s effective closing of a category of fiduciary in the context of a financial advisory relationship nullified this Court’s articulation of the policy considerations that support the imposition of fiduciary obligations and equitable compensation and resulted in persons in such relationships in Ontario being treated differently than in other parts of Canada - Whether  autonomy and integrity of the trial process has been eroded by the appellate court’s intervention in the findings of fact made by the trial court

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Scott Edgelow and Top Edge Investments Ltd.

v. (29943)

John Hooks, Challenger Global Trading Ltd., 749640 Alberta Ltd., and Phoenix Technology Services Ltd. (Alta.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Motion for summary judgment - Security for costs - Appeals struck - Commercial law - Breach of agreement - Breach of fiduciary duty - Insider trading breaches - Oppression remedies - Whether a palpable and overriding error denies a person justice - Whether shareholders and investors are ensured of transparency in corporate law - Whether a matrimonial matter denies a person justice in other unrelated matters - Whether a person’s right to justice is denied by access to money, or lack thereof

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

G.M., and M.D.

v. (30071)

The Canadian Red Cross Society, Dawson, Jones, Singh/Shah, Vos; Yang and Kerekes Families; J.A.M. and D.L.M.; and Trustee under the Plan (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Bankruptcy - Amended Plan of Compromise and Arrangement - Governing law - Members of one class of creditors resident in eight provinces - Limitation period - Whether, in a Canada-wide mass tort resolution under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. C‐36  (“CCAA ”), a court may, retroactive to a date before insolvency, impose the time limitation periods of one provincial jurisdiction on every other jurisdiction in Canada - Whether the principles of the minimal impairment of the rights of creditors and their equality of treatment under CCAA  proceedings are altered in cases resolving Canada-wide mass tort claims - Whether a plan under the CCAA , resolving nation-wide mass torts, must “speak for itself” and be interpreted by giving the words their plain ordinary meaning as read by the creditors who received it and voted upon it, or whether a court may take into consideration policy issues not disclosed to the creditors and not before the court - What is the standard of review for appeals of a final order on questions of errors of law, in Canada-wide mass tort resolutions under the CCAA ?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Mark Cole and Alberton Properties Inc.

v. (29968)

The Corporation of the City of Hamilton, Mary Kiss, Marvin Caplan, Robert Morrow, Geraldine Copps, Len King and Peter Lampman (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural law - Summary Judgment - Torts - Damages - Appropriate standard of appellate review applicable to summary judgments - What is the proper scope of the tort of abuse of public office - Did the Court of Appeal err in failing to review the motion judge’s decision in respect of the elements of the tort of conspiracy to a standard of correctness - Appellate court’s failure to overturn motion judge’s decision to exclude various evidence, including expert evidence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                  CORAM:  Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

                                                                       Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30063)

Stephen Frederick Marshall, Keith Lawrence Julien, Christopher James Paul, Jason Wayne Marr, Simon Jospeh Wilmot, Donald Thomas Peterson, Stephen John Knockwood, Ivan Alexander Knockwood, Leander Philip Paul, William John Nevin, Roger Allan Ward, Mike Gordon Peter‐Paul, John Michael Marr, Carl Joseph Sack, Matthew Emmett Peters, Stephen John Bernard, William Gould, Camillius Alex Jr., John Allan Bernard, Peter Alexander Bernard, Eric Stephen Knockwood, Gary Hirtle, Jerry Wayne Hirtle, Edward Joseph Peter‐Paul, Angus Michael Googoo, Lawrence Eric Hammond, Thomas M. Howe, Daniel Joseph Johnson, Dominic George Johnson, James Bernard Johnson, Preston Macdonald, Kenneth M. Marshall, Stephen Maurice Peter‐Paul, Leon R. Robinson, Phillip F. Young (N.S.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional Law - Native Law - Treaty Rights - Aboriginal Title - To what extent, if at all, does the question of what was reasonably in the contemplation of the parties to one of the Halifax treaties of 1760-61 enter into the test to determine whether a particular resource gathering activity falls within the terms of that treaty? - Must a beneficiary of a right under one of the Halifax treaties of 1760-61 establish that (s)he exercised that right with community authority and within that community’s traditional territory? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in law in allowing the appeals and setting aside the convictions entered at trial without clearly identifying an error of law by the Summary Conviction Appeal Court? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in stating the test for occupation of lands for the purpose of establishing aboriginal title? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in failing to properly identify an error of law in the Summary Conviction Appeal Court Judge’s analysis of the scope of lands subject to the aboriginal title claim? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in applying the Mi’kmaq “Aboriginal perspective” to shape the test for occupation of lands for the purpose of establishing aboriginal title? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in rejecting the requirement of continuity of occupation for the purpose of establishing aboriginal title? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in stating the standard by which occupation adverse to exclusive native occupation is assessed? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in failing to characterize the Halifax treaties of 1760‐1761 as land cession treaties? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in failing to find that any aboriginal title to, or treaty rights respecting the cutting sites were extinguished by Crown grant? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in deciding that aboriginal title cannot be lost through dispossession or abandonment, or by acceptance of reservations? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in law in the test it adopted to determine if trees are a resource included in the right of the Mi’kmaq under the treaties of 1760-61 to harvest from Crown lands and trade for a moderate livelihood? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in law in its determination that the Indian rights provision of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 did not apply to Nova Scotia and did not protect the Aboriginal title of the Mi’kmaq? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in law in not applying proper tests for treaty rights and Aboriginal title, and in not applying the proper tests, or the tests it adopted, to the facts of the case and acquitting the Respondents, or one or more of them, on all counts, or on one or more counts? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in ordering a new trial on all counts and therefore the Respondents seek to set aside or vary that part of the disposition of the judgment from in which the Court of Appeal ordered a new trial on all counts? - Did the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal err in not acquitting all, or one or more Respondents, on all or some of the charges against them, and therefore the Respondents seek an order acquitting all of them on all counts, or, in the alternative, an order acquitting some one or more of them on all or some of the charges?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 1560

v. (30059)

Avalon East School Board (N.L.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Administrative law – Judicial review – Standard of review – Labour law – Labour relations  – School Board deciding upon level of service to be maintained during impending teacher strike – Union disagreeing with number of non-teacher employees designated essential by School Board – Newfoundland and Labrador Labour Relations Board (LRB) finding employer School Board solely responsible for setting level of public service to be maintained during strike – LRB deciding approximately one-half of those designated by School Board met definition of essential employees under Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, R.S.N. 1990, c. P-42 s. 10(13), as duties were “necessary for the health, safety or security of the public” – Non-teacher employees occupying positions as cleaners, custodians, program assistants for students with disabilities, and various maintenance workers – Whether courts below erred in upholding decision of LRB – What standard of review applies to the legal question whether the doctrine of stare decisis applies to the interpretation by an administrative tribunal of statutory provisions previously considered by a court on an earlier application for judicial review – In what circumstances, if any, are administrative tribunals bound by prior judicial consideration of statutory provisions made by a court in the context of prior applications for judicial review – To what extent should public service essential services provisions be interpreted to require that a labour relations board determine which positions are essential to health, safety or security of the public based on the level of service an employer unilaterally decides it wishes to maintain during a labour dispute – Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, R.S.N. 1990, c. P-42, s. 10(13)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

August 30, 2001

Newfoundland and Labrador Labour Relations Board

(O’Brien, St. Aubin [dissenting] and Alcock, Members)

Respondent’s request to have 141 employees declared essential pursuant s. 10 of the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, granted in part (75 employees declared essential)

Réjeanne Gagnon

c. (30146)

Ville de Montréal (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Responsabilité civile - Droit municipal - Municipalité - Négligence - Dommages intérêts - Chute sur le trottoir de la ville - Piège - Danger inhérent - Les instances inférieures ont-elles commis une erreur dans l’interprétation de la notion de piège, de «dangerosité intrinsèque» et de «connotation d’anormalité et de surprise» tel qu’énoncé dans l’arrêt Rubis c. Grey Rocks Inn Ltd, [1982] 1 R.C.S. 452 ? - Les instances inférieures ont-elles commis une erreur en n’appliquant pas la norme de diligence ? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle commis une erreur en concluant qu’il était impossible de déterminer si la plainte de la commerçante avait été transmise à l’intimée ? - Les instances inférieures ont-elles mal évalué la preuve ? - Les instances inférieures ont-elles commis une erreur relative au lien de causalité entre la négligence ou la faute de la Ville et la chute de la demanderesse?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Solomon Windheim

c. (30094)

Banque Toronto Dominion, Miriam Windheim, Ellen Windheim et les Promotions Taillon Ltée. (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Compétence des tribunaux d’appel - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en déclarant que le jugement de première instance contenait des erreurs manifestes et dominantes au sens de l’arrêt Housen c. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 R.C.S. 235? - La Cour d’appel du Québec a-t-elle erré en ne respectant pas la règle fondamentale audi alteram partem?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Abattoir A. Trahan Transformation inc. et Abattoir St‐Alexandre (1982) inc.

c. (30114)

Fédération des producteurs de porcs du Québec et

 Régie des marchés agricoles et alimentaires du Québec (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Contrôle judiciaire - Définition de la norme de contrôle de l’erreur manifestement déraisonnable - Décision de la Régie intimée à l’effet que la Fédération intimée a le pouvoir de modifier unilatéralement l’équation de rendement de l’appareil électronique utilisé par les demanderesses pour mesurer le poids des carcasses de porcs et leur classe de rendement - La Cour d’appel, à la majorité, a‐t‐elle erré en déclarant que la décision de la Régie n’était affectée d’aucune erreur de compétence ni d’aucune erreur manifestement déraisonnable justifiant l’exercice du pouvoir de révision judiciaire ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

                                                             CORAM:  Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

                                                                  Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

Ferme Geléry inc.

v. (30116)

Municipalité de Laverlochère et Monique Rivest, ès qualités de secrétaire‐trésorière de la Municipalité de Laverlochère (Qc)

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

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and Montreal Gazette Group Inc.

v. (29964)

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario and the Attorney General of Ontario (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes – Interpretation – Criminal Law – Procedural law – Whether the disclosure of a search warrant containing wiretap evidence constitutes an unlawful disclosure of such evidence pursuant to section 193  of the Criminal Code  – If the public is given access to search warrants, whether the media are entitled to publish their contents, whether or not charges have been laid.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Cité de Dorval

c. (30076)

Gaz Métropolitain Inc. et Société nationale d'assurance Inc., Les Clairvoyants, Compagnie d'assurance générale, Compagnie d'assurance commerce et industrie du Canada, Compagnie d'assurance canadienne générale, Zurich Compagnie d'assurance, Boréal Assurances Inc., Simcoe & Erié, Cie d'assurance générale et Reliance Insurance Company (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Responsabilité civile - Négligence - Dommages‐intérêts - Évaluation - Les directives de Gaz Métropolitain inc. sont-elles inadéquates et insuffisantes pour assurer la sécurité du public? - Les employés de Gaz Métropolitain inc. ont-ils fait preuve d’insouciance et de grossière négligence? - La Cour supérieure et la Cour d’appel ont-elles omis à tort d’appliquer la théorie du « novus actus interveniens » et du « last responsible agent » à l’égard des fautes commises par les préposés de Gaz Métropolitain inc.? - Gaz Métropolitain peut-elle être tenue responsable si ses préposés ont suivi les directives de l’officier du service des incendies de la Cité de Dorval en charge de la situation d’urgence? - Lorsque deux défendeurs sont tenus responsables d’un manque de communication, le co-défendeur en situation d’autorité devrait-il assumer une plus grande part de responsabilité?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Industries de maintenance Empire Inc.

c. (30131)

Commission de la construction du Québec (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Droit du travail - Contrôle judiciaire - Relations de travail - Législation - Interprétation - Travaux de construction - Exemption - Employeur non professionnel - Les travaux effectués par les employés de la demanderesse constituent-ils des travaux d’entretien et de réparation au sens de la Loi sur les relations du travail dans l’industrie de la construction, L.R.Q. c. R‐20 ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Darlene Cottrelle, Lynwood Cottrelle, Brenda Cottrelle, William Cottrelle

and William George

v. (30109)

Alexander B. Gerrard (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Negligence - Liability - Damages - Recovery in tort - Causation - Loss of chance - Whether the causation principles enunciated in Athey v. Leonati, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 541, interact with this Court’s decision to preclude recovery in tort for loss of chance in Laferrière v. Lawson, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 458 - Whether this Court’s decision in Laferrière, supra., is applicable to common law provinces - Whether the rule precluding recovery in tort for loss of chance can be reconciled with the principle of concurrent liability of professionals.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

01.03.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR 

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to March 23, 2004.

01.03.2004

Before / Devant : THE CHIEF JUSTICE

DISMISSED / REJETÉE 

UPON APPLICATION by the appellant for an order stating a constitutional question in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The application to state a constitutional question is dismissed.

01.03.2004

Before / Devant : ARBOUR J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the intervener, the Attorney General of Ontario, for an order extending the time to serve and file its factum and book of authorities to February 16, 2004, and for an order permitting the Attorney General of Ontario to present oral argument at the hearing of this appeal.

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1) The motion to extend the time to serve and file the Attorney General of Ontario’s factum and book of authorities to February 16, 2004, is granted.

2) The Attorney General of Ontario is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding fifteen (15) minutes at the hearing of the appeal.

01.03.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR 

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to 30 days from this decision.

02.03.2004

Before / Devant : IACOBUCCI J.

UPON APPLICATION by the Village of Port Clements for leave to intervene in the above appeal and pursuant to the order of January 20, 2004;

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT the said intervener, Village of Port Clements, is granted permission to present oral argument not exceeding ten (10) minutes at the hearing of the appeal.

01.03.2004

Before / Devant : THE CHIEF JUSTICE

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE  

UPON APPLICATION by the appellant for an order adjourning the hearing of the appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

This appeal, now tentatively scheduled to be heard on May 17, 2004, shall be adjourned to a date to be set by the Registrar which date shall be subsequent to October 1, 2004.

23.2.2004

Pierre Rémillard

c. (29833)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Qc)

27.2.2004

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (29920)

David Jeff Elias (Man.)

                                                                               SUPREME COURT OF CANADA SCHEDULE

                                                                                     CALENDRIER DE LA COUR SUPREME

                                                                                                           - 2003 -

        04-07-2002

                                                                                                           - 2004 -