Communiqués

Informations sur la décision

Contenu de la décision

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA ‑‑ JUDGMENTS TO BE RENDERED IN LEAVE APPLICATIONS

OTTAWA, 19/9/00.  THE  SUPREME  COURT  OF  CANADA  ANNOUNCED  TODAY  THAT  JUDGMENT  IN  THE  FOLLOWING  APPLICATIONS  FOR  LEAVE  TO  APPEAL  WILL  BE  DELIVERED  AT  9:45  A.M.  ON  THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21,  2000.  THIS  LIST  IS  SUBJECT  TO  CHANGE.

FROM:  SUPREME  COURT  OF  CANADA  (613) 995‑4330

 

COUR SUPRÊME DU CANADA ‑‑ PROCHAINS JUGEMENTS SUR DEMANDES D’AUTORISATION

OTTAWA, 19/9/00.  LA  COUR  SUPRÊME  DU  CANADA  ANNONCE  QUE  JUGEMENT  SERA  RENDU  DANS  LES  DEMANDES  D'AUTORISATION  D'APPEL  SUIVANTES  LE  JEUDI 21 SEPTEMBRE 2000, À 9 H 45.  CETTE  LISTE  EST  SUJETTE  À  MODIFICATIONS.

SOURCE:  COUR  SUPRÊME  DU  CANADA  (613) 995‑4330

 

 

1.             Konrad Kovacevic v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Crim.)(27886)

 

2.             Dai Geun Rhee v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Crim.)(27863)

 

3.             Margaret K. Witte v. The Workers’ Compensation Board of The Northwest Territories, The Corporate Board of The Workers’ Compensation Board of The Northwest Territories, Sheila Fullowka, Doreen Shauna Hourie, Tracey Neill, Judit Pandev, Ella May Carole Riggs, Doreen Vodnoski and James O’Neil (N.W.T.)(27751)

 

4.             Paul Kenneth Bernardo v. Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.)(Crim.)(27925)

 

5.             Patrick Russell Hurst v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Crim.)(27919)

 

6.             Rachel Kleven v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Crim.)(27586)

 

7.             United Transportation Union v. International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, Via Rail Canada Inc. and George Cairns (F.C.A.)(27765)

 

8.             Robert E. Zelinski and Ken A. Whent v. Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.A.)(27748)

 

9.             Her Majesty the Queen v. B.J.S. (B.C.)(Crim.)(27847)

 

10.           Her Majesty the Queen v. B.J.S. (B.C.)(Crim.)(27976)

 

11.           Conex Services Incorporated v. Bogner Developments Limited and Leon Samuel Bogner (B.C.)(27671)

 

12.           Aditya Narayan Varma v. Canada Labour Relations Board, Canadian Union of Postal Workers and Canada Post Corporation (F.C.A.)(27836)

 

 

13.           Seven-Up Canada Inc., Pathfinder Beverages Ltd., 161275 Canada Inc. and Thomas B. Baker v. Fasken Campbell Godfrey and Campbell Godfrey & Lewtas (Ont.)(27825)

 

14.           Guiseppe Rosati v. Antanas Liakus (Ont.)(27719)

 

15.           Robert Donald VanDenburgh v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)(Crim.)(28015)

 


16.           Earl Daniel Stevenson v. Her Majesty the Queen (Sask.)(Crim.)(27620)


17.           Buck Consultants Limited v. Her Majesty the Queen (F.C.A.)(27707)

 

18.           Market News Publishing Inc. and Robert Shore v. Southam Inc. and David Baines (B.C.) (27853)

 

19.           Dragisa Gajic v. Her Majesty the Queen in the Name of Revenue Canada, et al. (F.C.A.) (Civil)(27750)

 

20.           Jacob F. Goohsen v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(Sask.)(27926)

 

21.           Steeve Martel c. Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)(27907)

 

22.           Stéphane Bourbeau c. Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.)(Qué.)(27906)

 

23.           Gary John Lazeo v. Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.)(B.C.)(27830)

 

24.           Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co., et al (F.C.A.)(27764)

 

25.           Gail Snider v. Manitoba Association of Registered Nurses (Man.)(27783)

 

26.           Allan Durand v. Jean Bastien (Alta.)(27818)

 

27.           Sa Majesté la Reine c. Éric Fournier (Crim.)(Qué.)(27866)

 

28.           Bank of Montreal v. Enchant Resources Ltd., et al (Alta.)(27766)

 

29.           Sonja Van Halteren v. Mark Steven Wilhelm (B.C.)(27786)

 

30.           D.T.A. c. M.E.L. (Qué.)(27984)

 

31.           ABI Biotechnology Inc. v. Apotex Inc.,et al (Man.)(27795)

 

32.           The Friends of the West Country Association v. Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, et al.  (F.C.A.)(27644)

 

33.           John Hollick v. The City of Toronto (Ont.)(27699)

 Vous allez être redirigé vers la version la plus récente de la loi, qui peut ne pas être la version considérée au moment où le jugement a été rendu.