Bulletins

      OF CANADA                                             DU CANADA   

             BULLETIN  OF                                          BULLETIN DES

             PROCEEDINGS                                          PROCÉDURES

April 30, 2004 698 - 759                                                                       Le 30 avril 2004

CONTENTS                                                     TABLE DES MATIÈRES

G.S.

Claude Grant

c. (30238)

G.G. (Qc)

Fannie Côtes

Sanson, Côtes, Gardner

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 22.3.2004

Walter Ricky Filewich, et al.

Scott B. Stewart

Stewart & Company

v. (30277)

Debra Batchelder, et al. (B.C.)

Barry R. Fraser

McCarthy, Tétrault

FILING DATE: 2.4.2004

James Darren Bennett

Patrick D. Angly

v. (30266)

Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)

John M. Gordon

Attorney General of British Columbia

FILING DATE: 5.4.2004

The Rose Corporation, et al.

Stephen R. Morrison

Cassels, Brock & Blackwell

v. (30267)

American Home Assurance Company (Ont.)

Robert J. Clayton

Genest, Murray

FILING DATE: 6.4.2004

City of Toronto

David Stockwood, Q.C.

Stockwoods

v. (30270)

Zari K. Banihashem-Bakhatiari, et al. (Ont.)

Barry A. Percival, Q.C.

Benson, Percival, Brown

FILING DATE: 6.4.2004

Pêcheries Nicol Desbois Inc.

Éric Tremblay

Tremblay & Tremblay Avocats

c. (30279)

Lloyd’s of London, Simon Philip Cooper Sundicat 590, et autres (Qc)

Danielle Ferron

Borden, Ladner, Gervais

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 8.4.2004

H.J. Pfaff Motors Inc.

Douglas D. Langley

Wilson, Vukelich

v. (30278)

Corporate Cars, a limited partnership of Tracmount/Glojack Leasing Ltd., et al. (Ont.)

Barry Rubinoff

FILING DATE: 8.4.2004

Le Groupe HPS (9045-8779 Québec inc.), et autres

André Bois

Tremblay, Bois, Mignault, Lemay

c. (30281)

Le bureau des services financiers (Qc)

Michel Jolin

Langlois, Kronström, Desjardins

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 8.4.2004

Arthur Froom

David B. Cousins

v. (30215)

The Minister of Justice (F.C.)

Dale Yurka

Attorney General of Canada

FILING DATE: 19.4.2004

Autobus Jean Bélanger Inc., et autres

Serge Bouchard

Pothier, Delisle

c. (30215)

Syndicat du transport de la région du grand-portage (CSN) (Qc)

Jean Laroche

Pépin & Roy

DATE DE PRODUCTION : 17.3.2004

APRIL 26, 2004 / LE 26 AVRIL 2004

                                                    CORAM:  Chief Justice McLachlin and Major and Fish JJ.

                                                          La juge en chef McLachlin et les juges Major et Fish

Sebastian Peter Cerra

v. (30136)

Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (B.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law - Trial - Does the learned trial judge’s failure to make a preliminary determination as to the admissibility of identification evidence substantiate a wrong decision on questions of law and a miscarriage of justice? - When the disposition of evidence supports that the verdict is unsafe, and supported by the evidence, how is this issue of public importance, how does it affect all Canadians, and should the Supreme Court of Canada review, re-weight the evidence? - How does “evidence of intoxication” affect or substantiate a “conflict of doctrines”? How is intoxication evidence inherent to the doctrine of planning and deliberation, and separate from the issue as a defence murder? Does it establish a heavy obligation on the learned trial judge to include, instruct, and put the jury to decide the doctrines of, “intent, provocation, mental capacity, manslaughter, and reasonable doubt”? - How are the trial proceedings and the verdict affected by the learned trial judge’s failure to ever include, or properly instruct the jury on the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Chief Percy Williams, on his own behalf and on behalf of all other members of the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah‐Kwa‐Mish Tribes

v. (30180)

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Heritage Salmon Ltd. (F.C.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes - Interpretation - Maritime law - Fisheries - Whether the Respondent Minister can licence the destruction of predator seals and sea lions as “fishing” under s. 7  of the Fisheries Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. F-14 , or whether it should be authorized as “by any means other than fishing” under s. 32 of the Act.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                                  CORAM:  Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

                                                                       Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

Kevin Albert Ducharme

v. (30261)

Her Majesty the Queen (Crim.) (Man.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal Law (Non Charter)- Evidence - Confessions - Voluntariness of Statement - Failure to videotape - Did the Court of Appeal err in law in finding that the Crown had provided a sufficient contemporaneous record, absent video-taping, to establish voluntariness of the Applicant’s statements ? - Did the Court of Appeal err in law in finding that the principled approach to hearsay as applied to inconsistent witness statements did not apply to confessions of an accused.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The Ontario Judges' Association, The Ontario Family Law Judges' Association and The Ontario Provincial Court (Civil Division) Judges' Association

v. (30148)

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario, as Represented by the Chair of Management Board (Ont.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional law – Judicial independence – Judicial review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of the “simple rationality” standard of review, including whether the simple rationality test requires the government’s reasons for rejection of a judicial remuneration commission’s recommendations be responsive to the rationale a commission gives for its recommendations – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its determination of the proper procedure a government must follow in rejecting a commission’s proposals, in particular, whether a government is entitled to engage in a parallel process – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding affidavit evidence describing such a parallel process and containing new facts and arguments which were never placed before the commission, is admissible to bolster a government’s reasons for rejection .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                                                             CORAM:  Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

                                                                  Les juges Bastarache, LeBel et Deschamps

Titus Nguiagain

c. (30203)

Sa Majesté la Reine (Crim.) (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit criminel - Procédure - Motifs de droit - L’application de l’art. 66(2) de Loi sur la Cour suprême serait-elle conditionnelle du fardeau de l’identification d’une quelque «question d’importance majeure_ dont la Cour suprême devrait se saisir ou au fardeau de la preuve de l’existence d’un _doute sur le bien-fondé de l’arrêt _ entrepris contre le tribunal inférieur? - L’art. 236 du Code de procédure civile s’applique-t-il ou devrait-il s’appliquer d’office aux procédures judiciaires en matières criminelle et pénale?  Si oui, l’art. 238 C.p.c. viole-t-il les dispositions impératives des articles 7  et 11d)  de la Charte  canadienne , des articles 1b), 2e) et 2f) de la Déclaration canadienne des droits, ainsi que les articles 1, 4, 23, 24 et 33 de la Charte québécoise? - Les cinq motifs d’appel exposés devant la Cour d’appel du Québec, et en particulier le motif relatif au manquement aux principes de déontologie judiciaire, sont-ils de véritables questions de droit, au sens de l’art. 839(1)  du Code criminel  ou de l’art. 291 du Code de procédure pénale ou encore au sens des articles 40(1), 43(1)a) et 61 de la Loi Cour suprême du Canada?  Si oui, les tribunaux inférieurs auraient-ils transgresser la Charte canadienne  notamment les articles 7 et 11? - Dans le cadre des procédures sommaires, en termes d’exigence dans la norme de contrôle judiciaire des décisions ou en termes de probabilité de succès, quels seraient les avantages comparatifs entre les deux voies d’appel concurrentes, soit le recours en vertu de l’art. 813  du Code criminel  et l’appel selon l’art. 813 du Code?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Éric Lavoie

c. (30224)

André Perras et Société nationale d'assurance (Qc)

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Responsabilité civile - Négligence - Preuve - Demandeur devenu tétraplégique après s’être fracturé la colonne cervicale en plongeant dans la piscine de l’intimé - La Cour d’appel pouvait-elle retenir les normes du National Spa and Pool Institute (NSPI) comme un outil fiable comparable en matière de sécurité de plongeon en piscine ? - Portée, en Cour d’appel, d’un arrêt américain condamnant le NSPI à payer des dommages à une personne tétraplégique parce qu’il n’a pas modifié ses normes malgré une étude l’avisant des risques reliés à l’installation d’un tremplin sur certains modèles de piscine - L’intimé pouvait-il plaider son absence de responsabilité et tenter de transférer celle-ci à l’entrepreneur qui a installé le tremplin ? - Les tribunaux en l’instance pouvaient-ils refuser de retenir, comme outil fiable comparable, la norme prévue à l’art. 15 du  Règlement sur la sécurité dans les bains publics, R.R.Q., ch. S-3, r. 3 ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

Grecon Dimter Inc.

v. (30217)

J.R. Normand Inc. and Scierie Thomas‐Louis Tremblay Inc. (Que.)

NATURE OF THE CASE

Civil Code - Interpretation - International law - Conflict of laws - Declinatory exception - Forum selection clause - Articles 3135, 3139 et 3148 of the Civil Code of Quebec, S.Q. 1991, c. 64 - What is the proper test for deciding whether an exclusive jurisdiction clause (art. 3148 in fine) prevails over a demand to hear both principal and incidental matters together (art. 3139)? - In the event that this Court concludes that the proper test is to presumptively apply art. 3148 in fine in a manner consistent with Z.I. Pompey Industrie v. ECU-Line N.V. [2003] 1 S.C.R. 450, how must it be applied in the instant manner? - Alternatively, in the event that this Court concludes that the proper test to be applied is forum non conveniens, should the burden of proving that the case is better heard elsewhere be on the party seeking enforcement of the exclusive jurisdiction clause or on the party seeking exercise of jurisdiction in Quebec? - Alternatively, in the event that this Court concludes that the proper test to be applied is forum non conveniens, how must it be applied in the presence of a valid exclusive jurisdiction clause?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

JANUARY 29, 2004 / LE 29 JANVIER 2004

(REVISED APRIL 23, 2004 / RÉVISÉ LE 23 AVRIL 2004)

29875                    Estate of Farida Shah by her Executrix Ammina Pharwala and Estate of Jennifer Dawson by her Executor Patrick Dawson v. J.A.M. and D.L.M. (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number M29289, dated May 2, 2003, is dismissed.

La demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario, numéro M29289, daté du 2 mai 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts- Property law - Estates - Limitations - Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24 - Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23 - Survival of actions law - Discoverability -  whether an Ontario estate can rely on the pre-Baker v. Bolton (1808) 1 Camp. 493, 170 Eng. Rep 1033, common law action for tortuous homicide, or whether a wrongful death gives rise solely to a statutory action- Whether discoverability is available per 38(1) and (3) of the Trustee Act to allow a claim to go forward on behalf of an estate where personal representative unable to discover the material facts before limitation period expires - Whether this Court’s prior rulings on the discoverability is of general application to plaintiffs in Canada - Whether the discoverability principle extends the time until there is knowledge of the material circumstances of the tort for plaintiffs’ estates to sue for wrongful death - Is discoverability principle limited to two years from the date of death under the Trustee Act?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

APRIL 29, 2004 / LE 29 AVRIL 2004

29750                    Sameer Mapara v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

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

 The application for an extension of time to file the motion for reconsideration is granted and the motion for reconsideration of the application for leave to appeal dismissed October 2, 2003, is granted.

 La demande de prorogation de délai pour déposer la demande de réexamen est accordée et la demande de réexamen de la demande d'autorisation d'appel rejetée le 2 octobre 2003, est accordée. 

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law (non-Charter) - Evidence - Admission - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in affirming the trial judge’s decision to admit the testimony of an accomplice about a double hearsay statement that implicated the Applicant in a joint venture to murder - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in affirming the reasonableness of the trial judge’s decision that the Araujo test for investigative necessity under s. 186(1) (b) of the Criminal Code  was met for authorization #7 without giving proper consideration to the fact that another trial judge had reached the opposite conclusion - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in affirming the trial judge’s decision to admit call #79 on the basis that a target who initiates a telecommunication is always a “party to the communication” even when he is not on the phone, or otherwise participating in the conversation.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30090                    Her Majesty the Queen ex rel Linda Merk v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771 (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 603, dated October 21, 2003, is granted without costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Saskatchewan, numéro 603, daté du 21 octobre 2003, est accordée sans dépens. 

NATURE OF THE CASE

Statutes -- Interpretation -- Labour Standards Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. L-1, s. 74(1) -- Whether the lower courts erred in their interpretation of the words “lawful authority” found in s. 74(1) of the  Act.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

28920                    Ville de Saint‐Léonard et Ville d'Anjou c. Ville de Montréal (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐006792‐980, daté du 12 septembre 2001, est rejetée sans dépens.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐006792‐980, dated September 12, 2001, is dismissed without costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit Administratif - Appel - Recours - Les instances inférieures ont-elles erré dans leur détermination de la norme de contrôle applicable en matière de révision d’une décision ministérielle rendue en vertu du pouvoir discrétionnaire édicté à l’article 35 de la Loi sur la qualité de l’environnement? - La majorité de la Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en concluant que le remboursement de la dette devait se faire à intérêt composé dans les circonstances?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

29926                    671905 Alberta Inc. et M‐I Drilling Fluids Canada Inc. v. Q'Max Solutions Inc. (FC) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐560‐01, dated June 2, 2003, is dismissed with costs to the respondent, Q'Max Solutions Inc. and the application for leave to cross‐appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondents, 671905 Alberta Inc. and M‐I Drilling Fluids Canada Inc.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel fédérale, numéro A‐560‐01, daté du 2 juin 2003, est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de l'intimée Q'Max Solutions Inc. et la demande d'autorisation d'appel‐incident est rejetée avec dépens en faveur des intimées 671905 Alberta  Inc. et M‐I Drilling Fluids Canada Inc.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Patents - Validity - Inventors - Enforceability - Innocent naming of wrong inventor - Named inventor was neither the inventor nor the legal representative of the inventor - Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding patent valid but unenforceable - Whether the patent should have been varied to reflect the true inventor absent notice of request for variation - Whether the Commissioner of Patents has jurisdiction to issue a patent to a person who is neither the inventor nor the legal representative of the inventor - Whether the person found to be the inventor by the lower courts was the inventor - Whether the inventive concept originated in his mind or was disclosed to him and his only contribution was to verify or confirm the utility of the inventive concept - Whether, in a petition for a patent, the innocent naming as inventors and petitioners of only persons who have no entitlement to the invention constitutes a material untrue allegation rendering a patent void pursuant to s. 53  of the Patent Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. P-4  - Whether Apotex Inc. v. Wellcome Foundation Ltd., [2002] 4 S.C.R. 153, 2002 SCC 77, applied.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

29931                    Charles John Gordon Benoit, Athabasca Tribal Corporation, Lesser Slave Lake Indian Regional Council and Kee Tas Kee Now Tribal Council v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Attorney General of the province of Alberta, Attorney General of the province of Saskatchewan and Attorney General of the province of British Columbia (FC) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐47‐02, dated June 11, 2003, is dismissed with costs to the respondent, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel fédérale, numéro A‐47‐02, daté du 11 juin 2003, est rejetée avec dépens en faveur de l'intimée, Sa Majesté la Reine du chef du Canada

NATURE OF THE CASE

Native law - Treaties - Treaty 8 - Evidence - Oral evidence - Whether the Aboriginal signatories of Treaty 8 understood that the Treaty Commissioners had promised that they would not have any tax imposed upon them at any time for any reason - What Role does evidence of the subjective understanding of the parties play in determining common intention - Whether there is a different and higher standard of proof for claimants in aboriginal and treaty rights cases - Whether oral history is a different kind of hearsay subject to a pre‐determined set of rules, or is it to be approached using the “principled approach”.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

29956                    Kirkbi AG and Lego Canada Inc. v. Ritvik Holdings Inc./Gestions Ritvik Inc. (now operating as Mega Bloks Inc.) (F.C.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐395‐02, dated July 14, 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 fédérale, numéro A‐395‐02, daté du 14 juillet 2003, est accordée avec dépens en faveur des demanderesses quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Property law - Trade marks - Functional trade marks - Passing off - Whether the owner of a trade-mark which meets the statutory definition of “trade-mark” and which has been found to have acquired secondary meaning should be disentitled to relief from passing off on the grounds that the claimed mark is primarily functional - Whether the holder of an unregistered trade-mark has exclusive rights in the trade-mark - Whether the Trade-marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13, s. 7 (b) protects a right of property in goodwill from misrepresentation - Whether the principle behind statutory passing off under s. 7(b) is different from the principle behind common law passing off - Whether passing off in the Federal Court differs from passing off in the provincial courts - What is the significance of prior patents in determining whether a mark is a trade‐mark - Whether the elements of passing off had been proven.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30005                    Her Majesty the Queen v. Joshua Bernard (N.B.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Arbour and Fish JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick, Number 113/01/CA, dated August 28, 2003, is granted with costs to the respondent in any event of the cause.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Nouveau‐Brunswick, numéro 113/01/CA, daté du 28 août 2003, est  accordée avec dépens en faveur de l'intimé quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Constitutional law -Native law - Indians - Treaty rights - Aboriginal land title -Whether the Respondent has a treaty right to harvest and sell logs from Crown lands - Whether the treaty right can be exercised by individuals without community authority - Whether  the Respondent exceeded the inherent limitation of the treaty in respect of an individual’s right to harvest resources in order to earn a moderate livelihood - Whether the treaty right was extinguished by pre‐confederation legislation in the Province of New Brunswick - Whether infringement of the treaty right by s. 67(1)(c) of the Crown Lands and Forest Act, S.N.B. 1980, c. C‐38.1, was justified - Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010 - R. v. Marshall, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 456, R. v. Marshall, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 533, R. v. Sundown, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 393, Mitchell v. M.N.R., [2001] 1 S.C.R. 911.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30018                    Carolyn Desautels and Robert Desautels v. Katimavik, Opcan and Lise Mercier, Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Attorney General of Canada and Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Secretary of State (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C35587, dated August 28, 2003, is dismissed with no order as to costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C35587, daté du 28 août 2003, est rejetée sans aucune ordonnance relative aux dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Limitations - Negligence  - In what circumstances is government liable for damages or loss sustained by a participant in one of its programs? - Extent of courts’ discretion to relieve against statutory limitation periods in cross‐jurisdictional litigation.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30022                    W. Garth Fair Holdings Ltd. and W. Garth Fair v. Royal Bank of Canada, Dwight Hoit and Dave Cross (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C39788, dated September 3, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C39788, daté du 3 septembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial Law - Creditor and debtor - Guarantees of loans - Whether Bank extorted guarantees by threatening prosecution rendering guarantees void and unenforceable - Whether illegitimate pressure was imposed on signing of a forbearance agreement - Whether forbearance agreement was affirmed by conduct - Whether adverse inference ought to have been drawn against respondents and  not against applicant - Whether Court of Appeal erred in not permitting or addressing argument on a ground.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30028                    Einar Bjellebo (a.k.a. Bellfield) v. Her Majesty the Queen (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour 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 C33343, dated October 14, 2003, is dismissed.

 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 C33343, daté du 14 octobre 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal Law - Procedural Law - Evidence - Exclusion of evidence - R. v. Stillman, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 607- When should a court permit an unrepresented litigant to make new arguments and file new written arguments - Whether this Court should revisit the test for exclusion of evidence under s. 24(2)  of the Charter

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30063                    Her Majesty the Queen v. Stephen Frederick Marshall, Keith Lawrence Julien, Christopher James Paul, Jason Wayne Marr, Simon Joseph 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.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal and the application to cross‐appeal from the judgment of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, Number CAC 178066, dated October 10, 2003, are granted with costs to the respondents/applicants on cross‐appeal in any event of the cause.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel et la demande d'appel incident de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Nouvelle‐Écosse, numéro CAC 178066, daté du 10 octobre 2003, sont accordées avec dépens en faveur des intimés/ demandeurs de l'appel incident quelle que soit l'issue de l'appel.

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

30096                    Cory Howard Grandinetti v. Her Majesty the Queen (Alta.) (Criminal) (As of Right / By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta (Edmonton), Number 0003‐0179‐A4, dated October 31, 2003, is dismissed.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Alberta (Edmonton), numéro 0003‐0179‐A4, daté du 31 octobre 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  - Criminal law - Murder - Whether there are any limits to the investigative techniques that undercover officials can now use in order to secure culpatory statements from suspects - Whether police officers should be permitted to do in an undercover capacity what they are expressly prohibited from doing in uniform - Whether undercover police officers may encourage people to engage in illegal activities and then later use participation in those illegal activities to demonstrate bad character and thus predispose juries against the accused.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30113                    Her Majesty the Queen v. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and Sun Media Corporation (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C40662, dated October 17, 2003, is granted with no order as to costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C40662, daté du 17 octobre 2003, est accordée sans aucune ordonnance relative aux dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  – Freedom of the expression – Certiorari – Mandamus – Ex parte motion – Sealing order – Search warrant and related documents – Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in law in its setting out of the test to applied to the question of when and how the materials related to a search warrant application should be temporarily sealed in the public interest.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30135                    Fullercon Limited v. City of Ottawa, (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C39107, dated November 19, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C39107, daté du 19 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Commercial law - Contracts - Public procurement - Tendering process - Damages - Whether the court erred in law by failing to hold that where a tender is improperly awarded to a non-compliant bidder, the next lowest qualified bidder is entitled to damages for loss of opportunity - Whether the court erred by finding that the omission of the names of a tenderer’s proposed subcontractors was minor and capable of being corrected after the tender deadline - Proper measure of damages - Whether the court erred by failing to hold that based on the finding that the Respondent breached its duty to the Applicant to treat all bidders fairly, the Applicant ought to have been awarded damages equal to the costs of its preparing its bid and participating in the tender process.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30164                    Forces Motrices Batiscan Inc. c. Procureur général du Québec, pour le ministre de l'Environnement du Québec, Les amies‐es de la Batiscan, Anne‐Marie Lafontaine, Marie‐Paule Veillette, Jean Baril et Sylvain Lacasse (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Québec), numéro 200‐09‐003978‐027, daté du 1 décembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens en faveur du procureur général du Québec pour le ministre de l'Environnement du Québec.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Quebec), Number 200‐09‐003978‐027, dated December 1, 2003, is dismissed with costs to Attorney General of Quebec for the Minister of Environment of Quebec.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Droit de l’environnement - Contrôle judiciaire - Délivrance du certificat d’autorisation en vertu de la  Loi sur la qualité de l’environnement, L.R.Q. c. Q-2 - Pouvoir de révocation - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en écartant la norme de la décision correcte comme norme du contrôle judiciaire de la décision du Tribunal administratif du Québec de réviser une décision qu’il avait déjà rendue parce qu’elle aurait été, selon sa loi constitutive, affectée d’un vice de fond de nature à l’invalider ? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erré en concluant que le Tribunal administratif du Québec pouvait réviser, pour cause de vice de fond de nature à l’invalider, sa décision initiale selon laquelle le ministre de l’Environnement du Québec ne pouvait révoquer une autorisation qu’il avait octroyée que pour les seuls motifs énoncés à sa loi d’habilitation, sans disposer d’aucun autre pouvoir inhérent ou implicite au même effet ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30165                    Gaston Roch c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE Yval Béland c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE Marie‐Claude Plante c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE René Tardif c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE Daniel Julien c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE Théo Desjardins c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE Martin Bellehumeur c. La procureure générale du Canada ET ENTRE Robert Théberge c. La procureure générale du Canada (CF) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

 La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel des arrêts de la Cour d'appel fédérale, numéros A‐685‐01; A‐684‐01; A‐686‐01; A‐687‐01; A‐688‐01; A‐689‐01, A‐690‐01 et A‐691‐01, datés du 26 septembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

 The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgments of the Federal Court of Appeal, Numbers A‐685‐01; A‐684‐01; A‐686‐01; A‐687‐01; A‐688‐01; A‐689‐01, A‐690‐01 and A‐691‐01, dated September 26, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif - Droit du travail - Contrôle judiciaire - Assurance-emploi - Prestations - Rémunération -  Loi sur l'assurance‐emploi , L.C. 1996, c. 23  - Une somme qui n’est pas en contrepartie d’un travail accompli au sens traditionnel et qui n’a pas été ajouté expressément par la Commission dans le Règlement peut-elle être définie par interprétation comme étant de la rémunération au sens de la Loi sur l’assurance-emploi  et du Règlement sur l’assurance-emploi ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30166                    May C. Racine v. Clifford Racine (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Iacobucci, Binnie and Arbour JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C38515, dated December 5, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C38515, daté du 5 décembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Family law - Inclusion of matrimonial home in calculation of  net family property - What is the breadth of the risk of danger requirement for the actus reus in care or control cases - Is there an irrebuttable presumption of a risk of danger where individuals who use abuse of power perform these powers in a care or control manner unbecoming to their profession.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30182                    Jean Guy Bellegarde c. Ville Île Perrot (Qc) (Civile) (Autorisation)

Coram:                    Les juges Iacobucci, Binnie et Arbour

 La demande de prorogation de délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel du Québec (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐011539‐012, daté du 8 décembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

 The application for an extension of time is granted and the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐011539‐012, dated December 8, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit des biens - Titres de propriété - La Cour supérieure a-t-elle commis une erreur de droits relativement à la transmission des droits des héritiers et leur capacité de vendre leurs intérêts au demandeur? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle commis une erreur de droit en octroyant un droit de propriété par dédicace à Ville Île Perrot? - La Cour d’appel a-t-elle commis une erreur de droit en adjugeant un droit de propriété alors que l’intimée n’en a jamais fait la demande? - L’art. 422 L.C.V. viole-t-il l’art.15(1)  de la Charte canadienne  et l’art. 6 de la Charte québécoise?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30013                    John N. Jeddore v. Her Majesty the Queen (FC) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A‐709‐01, dated August 28, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel fédérale, numéro A‐709‐01, daté du 28 août 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Native Law - Reserves - Taxation - Whether the Court of Appeal misapplied the law of reserve creation in upholding the finding of the trial judge that a colonial reserve had not been set aside for the Mi’kmaq of Conne River in pre-Confederation Newfoundland - Whether the Court of Appeal misapplied the principles of interpretation of the evidence of oral tradition and the historical record - Whether the Crown can, as a matter of constitutional and fiduciary law, refuse to recognize the existence of the reserve in order to impose income tax on the Applicant where a colonial reserve had been set aside for the Mi’kmaq of Conne River in pre-Confederation Newfoundland - Indian Act , R.S.C. 1985, C. I-5, ss. 2(1) , 87(1) (b) - Income Tax Act , R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, s. 81 .

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30044                    Mehran Anvari v. Catherine Hassen (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C37445, dated September 16, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C37445, daté du 16 septembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Torts - Medical malpractice - Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in law by affirming the finding of the trial judge that the defendant surgeon was liable where there was no evidence that he breached the standard of care – Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario erred in law by according deference to the trial judge’s finding that the statistical rarity of a complication is circumstantial evidence of negligence when the risk of the complication materializes – Whether the surgeon is subject to strict liability when an adverse surgical outcome occurs for an unknown reason.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30085                    Cape Breton Development Corporation (Workers' Compensation Board Claim No. 921658) v. Estate of James Morrison, Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal and Workers' Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (N.S.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, Number CA 192454, dated October 2, 2003, is dismissed.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de la Nouvelle‐Écosse, numéro CA 192454, daté du 2 octobre 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Labour law - Workers’ compensation - Compensation - Entitlement - Federal employees - Survivor benefits - Proof - Benefit of the doubt - Applicability of the Workers’ Compensation Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 508, s. 187, to federal employees - What are the limits of the federal government’s delegation of the administration of workers’ compensation benefits to the provinces under the Government Employees Compensation Act?

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30129                    Kirk Morgan Pynn v. Her Majesty the Queen (N.L.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps 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 of Newfoundland and Labrador, Number 02/53, 2003 NLCA 54, dated October 20, 2003, is dismissed.

 La demande de prorogation du délai est accordée et la demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de Terre‐Neuve et Labrador, numéro 02/53, 2003 NLCA 54, daté du 20 octobre 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Canadian Charter  - Criminal - Criminal Law - Legal Aid - Notice of Appeal from convictions and sentences struck - The role of legal aid  in providing legal services to persons charged with serious offences - The adequacy of legal services provided by Legal Aid on a staff-office model - Whether provinces can legislate away clear conflicts of interest in providing those legal services - Whether the method and organizational structure to address conflicts of interest is adequate - Access to justice - The right to counsel of choice - Right to competent counsel - Right to retain and meaningfully instruct counsel.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30152                    John Jauvin c. Procureur général du Québec, Bertrand Poirier et Claude Séguin (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 (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐010293‐009, daté du 26 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐010293‐009, dated November 26, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Responsabilité civile - Négligence - Police - Quel est le critère que doivent utiliser les tribunaux dans l’appréciation des fautes que peuvent commettre des policiers en décidant de mener une enquête criminelle, en la poursuivant et en la développant, que cette enquête mène ou non à des accusations criminelles ? - Portée de l’art. 2858 du Code civil du Québec - Les dépositions en cause ont-elles été obtenues dans des conditions qui portent atteinte aux droits fondamentaux ? - Leur utilisation comme éléments de preuve est-elle susceptible de déconsidérer l’administration de la justice au sens de l’art. 2858 ? - La Cour supérieure et la Cour d’appel pouvaient-elles ignorer les conclusions de faits du juge Holland de la High Court of Justice de l’Ontario qui a entendu une preuve semblable et quel poids devaient-elles leur accorder ?

HISTORIQUE DES PROCÉDURES

30153                    Fernand Labrie c. Marcel Rheault (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 (Montréal), numéro 500‐09‐013940‐036, daté du 26 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal), Number 500‐09‐013940‐036, dated November 26, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

NATURE DE LA CAUSE

Droit administratif – Procédure – Révision judiciaire – Appel – Permission d’appel – La Cour d’appel a-t-elle erronément refusé d’accorder la permission d’appel?

HISTORIQUE PROCÉDURAL

30173                    Mervat S.A. Rashwan and Magdy A. Rashwan v. Joseph S. Farkas (Ont.) (Civil) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C40335, dated November 24, 2003, is dismissed with costs.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C40335, daté du 24 novembre 2003, est rejetée avec dépens.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Procedural Law - Costs - Interpretation - Rules of Civil Procedure - Appeal against an assessment of costs - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in affirming the assessment officer’s assessment of costs.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

30181                    Her Majesty the Queen v. Dimitre Dimitrov (Ont.) (Criminal) (By Leave)

Coram:                    Bastarache, LeBel and Deschamps JJ.

 The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C34922, dated December 24, 2003, is dismissed.

 La demande d'autorisation d'appel de l'arrêt de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, numéro C34922, daté du 24 décembre 2003, est rejetée.

NATURE OF THE CASE

Criminal law (Non Charter) - Evidence - Expert evidence - Admissibility - Mohan criteria - Relevance - Reliability - Forensic science - Barefoot impression - Expert testifying that Respondent accused “likely” wore winter boots found at crime scene - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in excluding the expert evidence of barefoot impression analysis by establishing too high a threshold for its admissibility  

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

19.4.2004

Before / Devant : LEBEL J.

DISMISSED / REJETÉE 

UPON APPLICATION by Alexander Barclay on his own behalf and on behalf of Patrick Barclay for an extension of 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:

This motion, which was filed after the dismissal of an application for leave to intervene by another intervener which attempted to raise similar issues, does not present a perspective and argument which would be useful to the Court in disposing of the present appeal as it is framed between the parties.  For this reason, the motion is dismissed.

20.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR 

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE 

20.4.2004

Before / Devant :  The Chief Justice McLachlin and Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour, Lebel, Deschamps and Fish JJ.

DISMISSED WITH COSTS / REJETÉES AVEC DÉPENS

UPON APPLICATIONS by the respondents (appellants on cross-appeal) for a rehearing on the issue of costs and to amend the judgment in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motions are dismissed with costs.

20.4.2004

Before / Devant : MAJOR J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

UPON APPLICATION by the applicant for an order extending the time to serve and file additional and new grounds in support of his application for leave to appeal to March 30, 2004;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

Accordingly, the motion is granted.  A final extension not subject to change is granted to the applicant to complete his application for leave to appeal by March 30, 2004.  The respondent shall have 30 days from this order to serve and file a supplementary response, if they wish.

21.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR  

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to March 25, 2004.

20.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE REGISTRAR 

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   The motion to amend the factum filed on February 20, 2004 is granted.

20.4.2004

Before / Devant : FISH J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to March 23, 2004.

21.4.2004

Before / Devant : THE CHIEF JUSTICE

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE

À LA SUITE DE LA DEMANDE de l’appelant visant à obtenir la formulation de questions constitutionnelles dans l’appel susmentionné;

ET APRÈS AVOIR LU la documentation déposée;

LES QUESTIONS CONSTITUTIONNELLES SUIVANTES SONT FORMULÉES:

1.         L’article 22  de la Loi sur l ’ assurance-emploi  empiète-t-il sur la compétence des provinces, plus particulièrement la compétence relative à la propriété et aux droits civils ou aux matières d’une nature purement locale ou privée en vertu des paragraphes 92(13)  et 92(16)  de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867  ?

2.         L’article 23  de la Loi sur l ’ assurance-emploi  empiète-t-il sur la compétence des provinces, plus particulièrement la compétence relative à la propriété et aux droits civils ou aux matières d’une nature purement locale ou privée en vertu des paragraphes 92(13)  et 92(16)  de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867  ?

3.         L’article 22  de la Loi sur l ’ assurance-emploi  excède-t-il la compétence du Parlement du Canada, plus particulièrement la compétence relative à l’assurance-chômage en vertu du paragraphe 91(2A) de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867  ?

4.         L’article 23  de la Loi sur l ’ assurance-emploi  excède-t-il la compétence du Parlement du Canada, plus particulièrement la compétence relative à l’assurance-chômage en vertu du paragraphe 91(2A) de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867  ?

1.         Does s. 22  of the Employment Insurance Act  encroach upon provincial legislative competence and, more particularly, provincial legislative competence over property and civil rights and matters of a merely local or private nature under ss. 92(13)  and 92(16)  of the Constitution Act, 1867 ?

2.         Does s. 23  of the Employment Insurance Act  encroach upon provincial legislative competence and, more particularly, provincial legislative competence over property and civil rights and matters of a merely local or private nature under ss. 92(13)  and 92(16)  of the Constitution Act, 1867 ?

3.         Is s. 22  of the Employment Insurance Act  ultra vires the Parliament of Canada and, more particularly, does it exceed the Parliament of Canada’s legislative competence over unemployment insurance under s. 91(2A) of the Constitution Act, 1867 ?

4.         Is s. 23  of the Employment Insurance Act  ultra vires the Parliament of Canada and, more particularly, does it exceed the Parliament of Canada’s legislative competence over unemployment insurance under s. 91(2A) of the Constitution Act, 1867 ?

21.4.2004

Before / Devant : LEBEL J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to March 31, 2004.

21.4.2004

Before / Devant : LEBEL J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉE   Time extended to April 1, 2004.

22.4.2004

Before / Devant : FISH J.

UPON APPLICATION by the respondents for an order:

1)             holding in abeyance and deferring the submission to the Court for consideration of the three separate applications for leave to appeal filed herein and any applications for leave to cross-appeal which the respondents may make until after the release of the decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal in the appeal from Nav Canada c. Wilmington Trust Co., [2000] J.Q. No. 5007 (S.C.) (“Inter-Canadien”); and

2)             extending until 30 days following the release of the decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal in Inter-Canadien the date by which the respondents are required to serve and file (A) their material responding to the three separate applications for leave to appeal filed herein and (B) any applications for leave to cross-appeal which the respondents may make;

or, in the alternative to 2);

3)             extending until 15 days or such other reasonable time as may be determined by the Court after the disposition of this motion the date by which the respondents are required to serve and file (A) their material responding to the three separate applications for leave to appeal filed herein and (B) any applications for leave to cross-appeal which the respondents may make; and

4)             permitting the respondents to file within 30 days after the release of the decision of the Quebec court of Appeal in Inter-Canadien such supplementary material as they consider appropriate in connection with such applications for leave to appeal and cross-appeal (provided that Parts I and V of any supplementary memorandum of argument shall not exceed 10 pages).

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1)         The respondents are granted an extension of time until 15 days following the release of the decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal in which to serve and file their response to the three (3) leave applications; and

2)         The applicants are each granted an extension of time until 15 days following the service of the respondents’ response to serve and file an eight (8) page reply.

3)         Costs to follow.

22.4.2004

Before / Devant : FISH J.

GRANTED / ACCORDÉES

UPON APPLICATIONS by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Martin Dion, the Coalition pour le mariage civil des couples de même sexe, the Working Group on Civil Unions, the United Church of Canada, the Canadian Unitarian Council and the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada, for leave to intervene in the above appeal;

AND HAVING READ the material filed;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, Martin Dion, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Coalition pour le mariage civil des couples de même sexe, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Working Group on Civil Unions, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the United Church of Canada, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Canadian Unitarian Council, is granted and the applicant shall be entitled to serve and file a factum not to exceed 20 pages in length.

The motion for leave to intervene of the applicant, the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada, 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 Attorney General of Canada and the interveners.

Where the record does not include material or information necessary to support the submissions of the interveners, the interveners shall be entitled to supplement the record by serving and filing only such relevant material or information as is reasonably necessary to support their submissions provided that such material or information is of assistance to the Court.

À LA SUITE DES DEMANDES de l’Association canadienne des libertés civiles, Martin Dion, la Coalition pour le mariage civil des couples de même sexe, le Working Group on Civil Unions, l’Église unie du Canada, le Conseil unitaire canadien et le Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada, visant à obtenir l’autorisation d’intervenir dans l’appel susmentionné;

ET APRÈS AVOIR LU la documentation déposée;

L’ORDONNANCE SUIVANTE EST RENDUE;

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par l’Association canadienne des libertés civiles est accordée; la requérante aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par Martin Dion est accordée; le requérant aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par la Coalition pour le mariage civil des couples de même sexe est accordée; la requérante aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par le Working Group on Civil Unions est accordée; le requérant aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par l’Église unie du Canada est accordée; la requérante aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par le Conseil unitaire canadien est accordée; le requérant aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

La demande d’autorisation d’intervenir présentée par  le Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada est accordée; le requérant aura le droit de signifier et déposer un mémoire de 20 pages tout au plus.

Les demandes visant à présenter une plaidoirie seront examinées après la réception et l’examen de l’argumentation écrite du Procureur général du Canada et des intervenants.

Si le dossier déposé ne contient pas des documents ou renseignements dont les intervenants ont besoin pour étayer leurs arguments, ces derniers auront droit de compléter le dossier en signifiant et déposant les seuls documents ou renseignements dont ils peuvent raisonnablement avoir besoin pour étayer leurs arguments, à la condition que ces documents et renseignements soient utiles à la Cour.

23.4.2004

Her Majesty the Queen

v. (30021)

René Luther Hamilton (Alta.)

23.4.2004

North Fraser Harbour Commission and General Chemical Canada Ltd.

v. (29971)

Environmental appeal board, et al. (B.C.)

23.4.2004

Coram:    The Chief Justice McLachlin and Iacobucci, Major, Binnie, Arbour, LeBel and Fish JJ.

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ