Summaries Sunday: Supreme Advocacy

On one Sunday each month we bring you a summary from Supreme Advocacy LLP of recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers a weekly electronic newsletter, SupremeAdvocacyLett@r, to which you may subscribe.

Summary of all appeals and leaves to appeal granted (so you know what the S.C.C. will soon be dealing with). For leaves, both the date the S.C.C. granted leave and the date of the C.A. judgment below are added in, in case you want to track and check out the C.A. judgment. (Mar. 15 – Apr. 11 2014, inclusive). 


Courts/Supreme Court: Appointment
Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss. 5 and 6 (Order in Council P.C. 2013-1105, October 22, 2013) (35586) Mar. 21, 2014
A lawyer with 10 years standing at the Barreau du Québec cannot be appointed to the S.C.C. pursuant to sections 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court Act, and Parliament cannot (except as a constitutional amendment) pass correcting legislation.

Criminal Law: Inmate Transfer; Habeas Corpus; Standard of Review; Concurrent Jurisdiction
Mission Institution v. Khela (B.C.C.A., Nov. 9, 2011) (34609) Mar. 27, 2014
Federal inmates can access provincial superior courts.

Criminal Law: Parole|
Canada (Attorney General) v. Whaling (B.C.C.A., Nov. 2, 2012)(35024) Mar. 20, 2014
The retrospective application of delayed day parole eligibility violates the s. 11(h) right not to be “punished . . . again”, and is not justified under s. 1.

Criminal Law: Pre-Sentence Credit
R. v. Carvery (N.S.C.A., Oct. 3, 2012) (35115)
Ineligibility for early release/parole may justify pre-sentence credit under the Truth in Sentencing Act.

Criminal Law: Pre-Sentence Credit; Retrospectivity
R. v. Clarke (O.N.C.A., Jan. 11, 2013) (35487)
Being charged after the Truth in Sentencing Act came into effect means the Act applies.

 Criminal Law: Pre-Sentence Credit
R. v. Summers (O.N.C.A., Mar.12, 2013) (35339)
No particular “circumstance” is excluded from consideration for pre-sentence credit under the Truth in Sentencing Act.

Workers’ Comp: Federal Employees; Chronic Stress; “Accidents”; Reasonableness
Martin v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board (Alta.C.A., Aug. 29, 2012) (35052) Mar. 28, 2014
Provincial boards and authorities are required under federal legislation to apply their own provincial laws and policies, provided they do not conflict, and here the Commission’s decision to reject the claim was reasonable.


Criminal Law: “Equally Plausible Explanation”
R. v. Vokurka (N.L.C.A., August 5, 2013) (35510) Judgment rendered March 21, 2014.
Abella J.: — “The dissenting judge was of the view that the trial judge erred in failing to adequately consider and explain why, in her view, the “equally plausible explanation” supporting the defence of accident was not accepted. We do not agree, and agree instead with the majority that the trial judge adequately explained why he rejected the possibility of accident and found that the charge was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Criminal Law: Voluntariness/Intent
R. v. Leinen (Alta.C.A., Aug. 12, 2013) (35531) Judgment rendered March 21, 2014.
LeBel J.: — “We are all of the view that the charge to the jury, read as a whole, contained no reversible error in relation to either voluntariness or intent. For these reasons, the appeal is allowed and the convictions are restored.”


Administrative Law: Utilities; Pensions
How are unfunded pension liabilities in regulated industries to be dealt with.
ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd., ATCO Electric Ltd. v. Alberta Utilities Commission (Alta. C.A., Sept. 23, 2013) (35624) Apr. 10, 2014

Charter: Minority Language Educational Rights
How do minority language educational rights work in practice re schools and facilities.
Association des parents de l’école Rose‑des‑vents et al. v. Ministry of Education of British Columbia, et al. (B.C.C.A., Sept. 20, 2013) (35619) Mar. 27, 2014

Civil Procedure: Foreign Judgments
There is a sealing order in this case, in the context of enforceability in Canada of foreign judgments.
Chevron Corporation, et al. v. Daniel Carlos Lusitande Yaiguaje, et al. (Ont. C.A., Dec. 17, 2013) (35682) Apr. 3, 2014

Civil Procedure: Mareva Injunctions; Contempt
Was a Mareva order violated here.
Peter W. G. Carey v. Judith Laiken (Ont. C.A., Aug. 27, 2013) (35597) Mar. 20, 2014

Criminal Law: Mandatory Minimums
Constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences for firearm offences.
R. v. Hussein Jama Nur et al. (Ont. C.A., Nov. 12, 2013) (35678) Apr. 10, 2014

Criminal Law: Mandatory Minimums
Summary same as that immediately above.
R. et al. v. Sidney Charles et al. (Ont. Nov. 12, 2013) (35684) Apr. 10, 2014

 Criminal Law: Unknown Third Party Evidence
When should unknown third party suspect evidence to go to a jury.
R. v. Mark Edward Grant (Man. C.A., Oct. 30, 2013) (35664) Mar. 20, 2014

Criminal Law: Wrongful Convictions
Are federal authorities liable for this Quebec wrongful conviction.
Réjean Hinse v. A.G. of Canada (Que. C.A., Sept. 11, 2013) (35613) Mar. 20, 2014

Labour Law/Administrative Law: Standard of Review; ‘Prudence’ Reviews
Can a ‘prudence’ review be done on a JR.
Ontario Energy Board v. Ontario Power Generation Inc., et al. (Ont. C.A., June 4, 2013) (35506) Mar. 20, 2014

Labour Law: Grievances
Did discrimination exist here re maternal/parental leave.
British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, et al. v. British Columbia Public School Employers’ Association, et al. (B.C.C.A., Sept. 20, 2013) (35623) Mar. 20, 2014

Tax: Assessments
Are tax assessments civil or criminal in characterization.
Julie Guindon v. R. (Fed. C.A., June 12, 2013) (35519) Mar. 20, 2014

Comments are closed.