Indexed As: Reference Re Securities Act
|
|
- Daniel Dalton
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 In The Matter Of a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning the proposed Canadian Securities Act, as set out in Order in Council P.C , dated May 26, 2010 (33718; 2011 SCC 66; 2011 CSC 66) Indexed As: Reference Re Securities Act Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell, JJ. December 22, Summary: In provincial references, both the Alberta Court of Appeal (510 A.R. 200; 527 W.A.C. 200) and the Quebec Court of Appeal (2011 QCCA 591), concluded that the proposed Canadian Securities Act (CSA) was unconstitutional. A reference was brought under s. 53 of the Supreme Court of Canada Act to determine the validity of the CSA. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the CSA as presently drafted was unconstitutional; it was not valid under the general branch of the federal power to regulate trade and commerce under s. 91(2) of the Constitution Act, Constitutional Law - Topic 5.1 General principles - Unwritten constitutional principles - Federalism (incl. principle of subsidiarity) - The Supreme Court of Canada provided an historic view of the federalism principle - The court stated that ss. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867, divided legislative powers between Parliament and the provincial legislatures - This division remained the "primary textual expression of the principle of federalism in our Constitution, agreed upon at Confederation" - Inherent in a federal system was the need for an impartial arbiter of jurisdictional disputes over the boundaries of federal and provincial powers - That impartial arbiter was the judiciary - The court stated that "notwithstanding the Court's promotion of cooperative and flexible federalism, the constitutional boundaries that underlie the division of powers must be respected." - See paragraphs 54 to 62. Constitutional Law - Topic 5.1 General principles - Unwritten constitutional principles - Federalism (incl. principle of subsidiarity) - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 2950]. Constitutional Law - Topic 1581 Extent of powers conferred - Double aspect doctrine - General - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "Canadian constitutional law has long recognized that the same subject or 'matter' may possess both federal and provincial aspects. This means that a federal law may govern a matter from one perspective and a provincial law from another. The federal law pursues an objective that in pith and substance falls within Parliament's jurisdiction, while the provincial law pursues a different objective that falls within provincial jurisdiction... This concept, known as the double aspect doctrine, allows for the concurrent application of both federal and provincial legislation, but it does not create concurrent
2 jurisdiction over a matter (in the way for example s. 95 of the Constitution Act, 1867 does for agriculture and immigration)." - See paragraph 66. Constitutional Law - Topic 2624 Determination of validity of statutes - Considerations - Motivation of legislature - A reference was brought under s. 53 of the Supreme Court of Canada Act to determine the validity of the proposed Canada Securities Act - Canada, Ontario and several interveners argued that the Act fell within federal jurisdiction to regulate trade and commerce under s. 91(2) of the Constitution Act, Other provinces and interveners asserted that the matter fell under provincial power over property and civil rights under s. 92(13) and trenched upon matters of a merely local or private nature (s. 92(16)) - Two other provinces opposed the Act, but sought a more nuanced approach - They contended that Parliament's participation in securities regulation was best achieved through an exercise in federalprovincial cooperation, as in the agricultural products marketing context - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "Canada must identify a federal aspect distinct from that on which the provincial legislation is grounded. The courts do not have the power to declare legislation constitutional simply because they conclude that it may be the best option from the point of view of policy. The test is not which jurisdiction - federal or provincial - is thought to be best placed to legislate regarding the matter in question. The inquiry into constitutional powers under ss. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 focuses on legislative competence, not policy." - See paragraphs 32 to 35 and 90. Constitutional Law - Topic 2950 Determination of validity of statutes or acts - Pith and substance - General principles - A reference was brought under s. 53 of the Supreme Court of Canada Act to determine the validity of the proposed Canada Securities Act - Canada, Ontario and several interveners argued that the Act fell within federal jurisdiction to regulate trade and commerce (Constitution Act, 1867, s. 91(2)) - Other provinces and interveners argued that the matter fell under provincial power over property and civil rights (s. 92(13)) - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Act as presently drafted was not valid under the general branch of the federal power to regulate trade and commerce (s. 91(2)) - The day-to-day regulation of securities within the provinces, which represented the main thrust of the Act (its pith and substance), remained essentially a matter of property and civil rights within the provinces (s. 92(13)) and therefore subject to provincial power - As important as the preservation of capital markets and maintenance of Canada's financial stability were, they did not justify a wholesale takeover of the regulation of the securities industry, the ultimate consequence of the proposed federal legislation - The court noted the growing practice of resolving the complex governance problems that arose in federations, not by the bare logic of either/or, but by seeking cooperative solutions that met the needs of the country as a whole as well as its constituent parts - Such an approach was supported by, inter alia, the Canadian constitutional principles - See paragraphs 91 to 133. Constitutional Law - Topic 5660 Federal jurisdiction (s. 91) - Regulation of trade and commerce - General - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "On its face, the general trade and commerce power (as distinguished from the more specific federal power to regulate interprovincial and
3 international trade and commerce) is broad - so broad that it has the potential to permit federal duplication (and, in cases of conflict, evisceration) of the provincial powers over large aspects of property and civil rights and local matters. This would upset the constitutional balance envisaged by ss. 91 and 92 and undermine the federalism principle. To avoid this result, the trade and commerce power has been confined to matters that are genuinely national in scope and qualitatively distinct from those falling under provincial heads of power relating to local matters and property and civil rights. The essence of the general trade and commerce power is its national focus." - See paragraph 70. Constitutional Law - Topic 5667 Federal jurisdiction (s. 91) - Regulation of trade and commerce - Matters of general national interest or concern - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 5660]. Constitutional Law - Topic 7201 Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Property and civil rights - General - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 5660]. Constitutional Law - Topic 7285 Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Property and civil rights - Regulatory statutes - Securities - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 2950]. Constitutional Law - Topic 7501 Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Matters of local or private nature - General - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 5660]. Cases Noticed: Lymburn v. Mayland, [1932] A.C. 318 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 43]. Multiple Access Ltd. v. McCutcheon et al., [1982] 2 S.C.R. 161; 44 N.R. 181, refd to. [para. 44]. Global Securities Corp. v. British Columbia Securities Commission et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 494; 252 N.R. 290; 134 B.C.A.C. 207; 219 W.A.C. 207; 2000 SCC 21, refd to. [para. 44]. R. v. W. McKenzie Securities Ltd. (1966), 56 D.L.R.(2d) 56 (Man. C.A.), leave to appeal denied [1966] S.C.R. ix, refd to. [para. 45]. West & Dubros v. The Queen - see R. v. W. McKenzie Securities Ltd. Gregory & Co. v. Quebec Securities Commission, [1961] S.C.R. 584, refd to. [para. 45]. Québec (Sa Majesté du Chef) v. Ontario Securities Commission - see Asbestos Corp., Société Nationale de l'amiante and Quebec, Re. Asbestos Corp., Société Nationale de l'amiante and Quebec, Re (1992), 58 O.A.C. 277; 10 O.R.(3d) 577 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied [1993] 2 S.C.R. x; 157 N.R. 400; 64 O.A.C. 320, refd to. [para. 45]. Bennett et al. v. British Columbia Securities Commission (1992), 18 B.C.A.C. 191; 31 W.A.C. 191; 94 D.L.R.(4th) 339 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 45]. Bell Canada v. Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (Qué.) and Bilodeau et al., [1988] 1 S.C.R. 749; 85 N.R. 295; 15 Q.A.C. 217, refd to. [para. 45]. Smith v. The Queen, [1960] S.C.R. 776, refd to. [para. 45].
4 Citizens' Insurance of Canada v. Parsons (1881), 7 App. Cas. 96 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 45]. Wakim, Re; Ex parte McNally, [1999] HCA 27; 198 C.L.R. 511, refd to. [para. 50]. R. v. Hughes, [2000] HCA 22, 202 C.L.R. 535, refd to. [para. 50]. Reference Re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217; 228 N.R. 203, refd to. [para. 54]. Reference Re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court (P.E.I.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3; 217 N.R. 1; 206 A.R. 1; 156 W.A.C. 1; 121 Man.R.(2d) 1; 158 W.A.C. 1; 156 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 483 A.P.R. 1, refd to. [para. 55]. Northern Telecom Canada Ltd. et al. v. Communication Workers of Canada et al. and Canada Labour Relations Board et al. (No. 2), [1983] 1 S.C.R. 733; 48 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 55]. Canada (Attorney General) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [1937] A.C. 326 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 56]. Hodge v. The Queen (1883), 9 App. Cas. 117 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 56]. Edwards v. Attorney-General for Canada, [1930] A.C. 124 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 56]. Reference Re Employment Insurance Act, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 669; 339 N.R. 279; 2005 SCC 56, refd to. [para. 56]. Ontario Public Service Employees' Union et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General) et al., [1987] 2 S.C.R. 2; 77 N.R. 321; 23 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 57]. Potato Marketing Board (P.E.I.) v. Willis, [1952] 2 S.C.R. 392, refd to. [para. 57]. Lord's Day Alliance of Canada v. Attorney General of British Columbia, [1959] S.C.R. 497, refd to. [para. 57]. Coughlin v. Ontario Highway Transport Board, [1968] S.C.R. 569, refd to. [para. 57]. Fédération des producteurs volailles du Québec et al. v. Pelland, [2005] 1 S.C.R. 292; 332 N.R. 201; 2005 SCC 20, refd to. [para. 58]. Canadian Western Bank et al. v. Alberta, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 3; 362 N.R. 111; 409 A.R. 207; 402 W.A.C. 207; 2007 SCC 22, refd to. [para. 60]. RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199; 187 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 63]. Quebec (Attorney General) v. Lacombe et al. (2010), 407 N.R. 1; 2010 SCC 38, refd to. [para. 63]. Kitkatla Indian Band et al. v. British Columbia (Minister of Small Business, Tourism and Culture) et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 146; 286 N.R. 131; 165 B.C.A.C. 1; 270 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 31, refd to. [para. 63]. Reference Re Firearms Act (Can.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 783; 254 N.R. 201; 161 A.R. 201; 225 W.A.C. 201; 2000 SCC 31, refd to. [para. 65]. Initiative and Referendum Act, Re, [1919] A.C. 935 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 71]. Lawson v. Interior Tree Fruit and Vegetable Committee of Direction, [1931] S.C.R. 357, refd to. [para. 72]. General Motors of Canada v. City National Leasing - see City National Leasing Ltd. v. General Motors of Canada Ltd. City National Leasing Ltd. v. General Motors of Canada Ltd., [1989] 1 S.C.R. 641; 93 N.R. 326; 32 O.A.C. 332, appld. [para. 76]. Attorney General of Canada v. Canadian National Transportation Ltd. - see Canadian National Transportation Ltd. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General). Canadian National Transportation Ltd. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1983] 2 S.C.R. 206; 49 N.R. 241; 49 A.R. 39, refd to. [para. 76].
5 MacDonald v. Vapor Canada Ltd. - see Vapor Canada Ltd. et al. v. MacDonald. Vapor Canada Ltd. et al. v. MacDonald, [1977] 2 S.C.R. 134; 7 N.R. 477, refd to. [para. 76]. John Deere Plow Co. v. Wharton, [1915] A.C. 330 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 78]. Kirkbi AG et al. v. Ritvik Holdings Inc. et al., [2005] 3 S.C.R. 302; 341 N.R. 234; 2005 SCC 65, refd to. [para. 82]. Ontario Hydro v. Labour Relations Board (Ont.) et al., [1993] 3 S.C.R. 327; 158 N.R. 161; 66 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 116]. Duplain v. Cameron, [1961] S.C.R. 693, refd to. [para. 126]. Authors and Works Noticed: Canada, Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Proposals for a Securities Market Law for Canada (1979), vol. 2, p. 5 [para. 17]. Canada, Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Regulation of Securities in Canada (Draft) (1994), 17 OSCB 4401, preamble [para. 19]; sect. 29 [para. 20]. Canada, Royal Commission on Banking and Finance, Report of the Royal Commission on Banking and Finance (1964), p. 348 [paras. 13, 14]. Canada, Royal Commission on Price Spreads, Report of the Royal Commission on Price Spreads (1935), pp. 41, 42 [para. 12]. Canada, Royal Commission on the Economic Union and Development Prospects for Canada, Report, vol. 3, p. 167 [para. 18]. Crawford Panel on a Single Canadian Securities Regulator, Blueprint for a Canadian Securities Commission - Final Paper (June 7, 2006), Online: p. 16 [para. 25]. Gillen, Mark R., Securities Regulation in Canada (3rd Ed. 2007), pp. 1, 32, 33 [para. 40]. Hockin Panel, Creating an Advantage in Global Capital Markets - Final Report and Recommendations (2009), pp. 60, 61 [para. 27]. Hogg, Peter W., Constitutional Law of Canada (5th Ed. Supp.) (updated 2010, release 1), vol. 1, p ff [para. 119]. Howard, John L., Securities Regulation: Structure and Process, in Proposals for a Securities Market in Canada (1979), vol. 3, p [para. 16]. Macey, Jonathan, An Analysis of the Canadian Federal Government's Initiative to Create a National Securities Regulator (2010), pp. 48, 49 [para. 52]. Milne, Frank, The Impact of Innovation and Evolution on the Regulation of Capital Markets (May 19, 2010), paras. 2.1 to 2-4 [para. 40]. Ontario Securities Commission, CANSEC: Legal and Administrative Concepts (November 1967), OSCB 61, p. 66 [paras. 15, 16]. Porter Commission - see Canada, Royal Commission on Banking and Finance. Suret, Jean-Marc, and Carpentier,Cécile, Securities Regulation in Canada (working paper) (July 2003), generally [para. 127]. Trebilcock, Michael J., National Securities Regulator Report (May 20, 2010), para. 26 [para. 103]. Wise Persons' Committee - Committee to Review the Structure of Securities Regulation in Canada, It's Time (2003), pp. 59 [paras. 23, 24]; 60 [para. 23]. Counsel:
6 Robert J. Frater, Peter W. Hogg, Q.C., Claude Joyal and Alexander Pless, for the Attorney General of Canada; Janet E. Minor, Jennifer A. August and S. Zachary Green, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Ontario; Jean-Yves Bernard, France Bonsaint and Hugo Jean, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Quebec; Gaétan Migneault, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of New Brunswick; Eugene B. Szach and Nathaniel Carnegie, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Manitoba; George H. Copley, Q.C., Nancy E. Brown and Donald Sutherland, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of British Columbia; Graeme G. Mitchell, Q.C., for the intervenor, the Attorney General for Saskatchewan; E. David D. Tavender, Q.C., D. Brian Foster, Q.C., L. Christine Enns and Jordan C. Milne, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Alberta; Andrew K. Lokan, Massimo C. Starnino and Michael Fenrick, for the intervenor, the Canadian Foundation for Advancement of Investor Rights; Luis Sarabia, Matthew Milne-Smith and David Stolow, for the intervenor, the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance; John B. Laskin and Darryl C. Patterson, for the intervenor, the Investment Industry Association of Canada; Mahmud Jamal, Éric Préfontaine and Raphael T. Eghan, for the intervenor, the Canadian Bankers Association; Kelley M. McKinnon and Brent J. Arnold, for the intervenor, the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board; Guy Paquette and Vanessa O'Connell-Chrétien, for the intervenor, Mouvement d'éducation et de défense des actionnaires; Raymond Doray and Mathieu Quenneville, for the intervenor, Barreau du Québec; Sébastien Grammond and Luc Giroux, for the intervenor, the Institute for Governance of Private and Public Organizations. Solicitors of Record: Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the Attorney General of Canada; Attorney General of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Ontario; Bernard, Roy & Associés, Montreal, Quebec, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Quebec; Attorney General of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of New Brunswick; Attorney General of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Manitoba; Attorney General of British Columbia, Victoria, British Columbia, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of British Columbia; Attorney General for Saskatchewan, Regina, Saskatchewan, for the intervenor, the Attorney General for Saskatchewan; Fraser Milner Casgrain, Calgary, Alberta, and Attorney General of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, for the intervenor, the Attorney General of Alberta;
7 Paliare, Roland, Rosenberg, Rothstein, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Canadian Foundation for Advancement of Investor Rights; Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance; Torys, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, the Investment Industry Association of Canada; Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervener, the Canadian Bankers Association; Gowling Lafleur Henderson, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenr, Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board; Paquette Gadler Inc., Montreal, Quebec, for the intervenr, Mouvement d'éducation et de défense des actionnaires; Lavery, de Billy, Montreal, Quebec, for the intervenor, Barreau du Québec; Fraser Milner Casgrain, Montreal, Quebec, for the intervenor, the Institute for Governance of Private and Public Organizations. This reference was heard on April 13 and 14, 2011, by McLachlin, C.J.C., Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada, who delivered the following decision, in both official languages, on December 22, Editor: Jana A. Andersen Order accordingly.
Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Robert Sarrazin and Darlind Jean (respondents) (33917; 2011 SCC 54; 2011 CSC 54)
Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Robert Sarrazin and Darlind Jean (respondents) (33917; 2011 SCC 54; 2011 CSC 54) Indexed As: R. v. Sarrazin (R.) et al. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., Binnie,
More informationIndexed As: Halifax (Regional Municipality) v. Human Rights Commission (N.S.) et al.
Halifax Regional Municipality, a body corporate duly incorporated pursuant to the laws of Nova Scotia (appellant) v. Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, Lucien Comeau, Lynn Connors and Her Majesty the
More informationIndexed As: Figueiras v. York (Regional Municipality) et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Rouleau, van Rensburg and Pardu, JJ.A. March 30, 2015.
Paul Figueiras (applicant/appellant) v. Toronto Police Services Board, Regional Municipality of York Police Services Board, and Mark Charlebois (respondents/respondents) (C58771; 2015 ONCA 208) Indexed
More informationIndexed As: McLean v. British Columbia Securities Commission
Patricia McLean (appellant) v. Executive Director of the British Columbia Securities Commission (respondent) and Financial Advisors Association of Canada and Ontario Securities Commission (interveners)
More informationIndexed As: Mavi et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al.
Attorney General of Canada (appellant) v. Pritpal Singh Mavi, Maria Cristina Jatuff de Altamirano, Nedzad Dzihic, Rania El-Murr, Oleg Grankin, Raymond Hince, Homa Vossoughi and Hamid Zebaradami (respondents)
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. The Queen, 2011 SCC 3 DATE: DOCKET: 32987
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. The Queen, 2011 SCC 3 DATE: 20110128 DOCKET: 32987 BETWEEN: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen and Stéphan
More informationIndexed As: Mounted Police Association of Ontario et al. v. Canada (Attorney General)
Mounted Police Association of Ontario/Association de la Police Montée de l'ontario and B.C. Mounted Police Professional Association on their own behalf and on behalf of all members of the Royal Canadian
More informationIndexed As: R. v. Spencer (M.D.)
Matthew David Spencer (appellant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) and Director of Public Prosecutions, Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of Alberta, Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Canadian
More informationKeith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen (applicants) v. The University of Calgary (respondent) ( ; 2010 ABQB 644)
In The Matter Of Keith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen on Findings of Non-Academic Misconduct on Appeal from the Ad Hoc Review Committee of the General Faculties Council Keith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen (applicants)
More informationIndexed As: Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society et al. v. Canada (Attorney General)
Attorney General of Canada (appellant) v. Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society and Sheryl Kiselbach (respondents) and Attorney General of Ontario, Community Legal Assistance Society,
More informationSyllabus. Canadian Constitutional Law
Syllabus Canadian Constitutional Law (Revised February 2015) Candidates are advised that the syllabus may be updated from time-to-time without prior notice. Candidates are responsible for obtaining the
More informationCase Name: Ontario (Attorney General) v. Fraser
Page 1 Case Name: Ontario (Attorney General) v. Fraser Attorney General of Ontario v. Michael J. Fraser on his own behalf and on behalf of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada, Xin Yuan
More informationThe Constitutional Validity of Bill S-201. Presentation to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights
The Constitutional Validity of Bill S-201 Presentation to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights Professor Bruce Ryder Osgoode Hall Law School, York University 22 November 2016 I am pleased
More informationRichard James Goodwin (appellant) v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) and Attorney General of British Columbia (respondents)
Richard James Goodwin (appellant) v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) and Attorney General of British Columbia (respondents) British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) and Attorney
More informationIndexed As: Workers' Compensation Board (B.C.) v. Human Rights Tribunal (B.C.) et al.
Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia (appellant) v. Guiseppe Figliola, Kimberley Sallis, Barry Dearden and British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (respondents) and Attorney General of British
More informationHer Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. William Imona Russel (accused) (C51166)
Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. William Imona Russel (accused) (C51166) Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. William Imona Russel (accused) (C51877) Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Paul Whalen
More informationIndexed As: Reference Re Senate Reform
In The Matter Of a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning reform of the Senate, as set out in Order in Council P.C. 2013-70, dated February 1, 2013 (35203; 2014 SCC 32; 2014 CSC 32) Indexed As:
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Hussein Jama Nur (respondent)
Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Hussein Jama Nur (respondent) Attorney General of Canada (appellant) v. Hussein Jama Nur (respondent) and Attorney General of Quebec, Attorney General of British Columbia,
More informationSa Majesté la Reine (appelante) v. Adjudant J.G.A. Gagnon (intimé)
Sa Majesté la Reine (appelante) v. Adjudant J.G.A. Gagnon (intimé) Sa Majesté la Reine (appelante) v. Caporal A.J.R. Thibault (intimé) (CMAC-577; CMAC-581; 2015 CMAC 2; 2015 CACM 2) Indexed As: R. v. Gagnon
More informationEmilian Peter (applicant) v. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (respondent) (IMM ; 2014 FC 1073)
Emilian Peter (applicant) v. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (respondent) (IMM-12508-12; 2014 FC 1073) Indexed As: Peter v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)
More informationIndexed As: R. v. J.F. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Fish, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis, JJ. March 1, 2013.
J.F. (appellant) v. Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association (intervenor) (34284; 2013 SCC 12; 2013 CSC 12) Indexed As: R. v. J.F. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin,
More informationIndexed As: Murphy v. Amway Canada et al. Federal Court of Appeal Nadon, Gauthier and Trudel, JJ.A. February 14, 2013.
Kerry Murphy (appellant) v. Amway Canada Corporation and Amway Global (respondents) (A-487-11; 2013 FCA 38) Indexed As: Murphy v. Amway Canada et al. Federal Court of Appeal Nadon, Gauthier and Trudel,
More informationIndexed As: Canadian National Railway v. Seeley et al. Federal Court Mandamin, J. February 1, 2013.
Canadian National Railway (applicant) v. Denise Seeley and Canadian Human Rights Commission (respondents) and Ontario Human Rights Commission, Federally Regulated Employers - Transportation and Communication
More informationSyllabus. Canadian Constitutional Law
Syllabus Canadian Constitutional Law (Revised February 2015) Candidates are advised that the syllabus may be updated from time-to-time without prior notice. Candidates are responsible for obtaining the
More informationLaw 201. Section 003. Professor Margot Young TOTAL MARKS: 75
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA FACULTY OF LAW WINTER EXAM - DECEMBER 12, 2016 THIS EXAMINATION CONSISTS OF THREE PAGES. PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE A COMPLETE PAPER. end of the exam before you leave
More informationThe Constitutionality of PIPEDA: A Re-consideration in the Wake of the Supreme Court of Canada s Reference re Securities Act
June, 2012 The Constitutionality of PIPEDA: A Re-consideration in the Wake of the Supreme Court of Canada s Reference re Securities Act Michel Bastarache Counsel to Heenan Blaikie LLP Former Justice of
More informationThe Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (appellant) v. Thanh Tam Tran (respondent) (A ; 2015 FCA 237)
The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (appellant) v. Thanh Tam Tran (respondent) (A-531-14; 2015 FCA 237) Indexed As: Tran v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)
More informationProceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992
Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 Dianna Louise Parsons, Michael Herbert Cruickshanks, David Tull, Martin Henry Griffen, Anna Kardish, Elsie Kotyk, Executrix of the Estate of Harry Kotyk,
More informationIBM Canada Limited (appellant) v. Richard Waterman (respondent) (34472; 2013 SCC 70; 2013 CSC 70) Indexed As: Waterman v. IBM Canada Ltd.
IBM Canada Limited (appellant) v. Richard Waterman (respondent) (34472; 2013 SCC 70; 2013 CSC 70) Indexed As: Waterman v. IBM Canada Ltd. Supreme Court of Canada McLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Fish, Abella,
More informationIndexed As: Hopkins v. Ventura Custom Homes Ltd. Manitoba Court of Appeal Hamilton, Chartier, C.J.M., and Beard, JJ.A. July 5, 2013.
William Eric Hopkins and Christa Leigh Hopkins (plaintiffs/respondents) v. Ventura Custom Homes Ltd. (defendant/appellant) (AI 12-30-07742; 2013 MBCA 67) Indexed As: Hopkins v. Ventura Custom Homes Ltd.
More informationIndexed As: Sun-Rype Products Ltd. et al. v. Archer Daniels Midland Co. et al.
Sun-Rype Products Ltd. and Wendy Weberg (appellants/respondents on cross-appeal) v. Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Incorporated, Cerestar USA, Inc., formerly known as American Maize-Products
More informationIndexed As: Iyamuremye et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Federal Court Shore, J. May 26, 2014.
Oscar Iyamuremye, Jean de Dieu Ntibeshya, Jeanine Umuhire et Karabo Greta Ineza (partie demanderesse) v. Le Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'immigration (partie défenderesse) (IMM-5282-13; 2014 CF 494;
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION : Royal Bank of Canada v. Radius Credit Union Ltd., 2010 SCC 48 DATE : 20101105 DOCKET : 33152 BETWEEN: Royal Bank of Canada Appellant and Radius Credit Union Limited Respondent
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Quebec (Attorney General) v. Canada (Human Resources and Social Development), 2011 SCC 60 DATE: 20111208 DOCKET: 33511 BETWEEN: Attorney General of Quebec Appellant and
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Impulsora Turistica de Occidente, S.A. de C.V. v., 2007 SCC 20 DATE: 20070525 DOCKET: 31456 BETWEEN: AND BETWEEN: AND BETWEEN: Impulsora Turistica de Occidente, S.A. de
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (applicant/appellant) v. Richard Gill (respondent/respondent) (C53886; 2012 ONCA 607) Indexed As: R. v. Gill (R.
Her Majesty the Queen (applicant/appellant) v. Richard Gill (respondent/respondent) (C53886; 2012 ONCA 607) Indexed As: R. v. Gill (R.) Ontario Court of Appeal Doherty, Lang and Epstein, JJ.A. September
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Gosselin (Tutor of) v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 238, 2005 SCC 15 DATE: 20050331 DOCKET: 29298 BETWEEN: Roger Gosselin, Guylaine Fillion, Daniel Trépanier,
More informationAnd In The Matter of [...] Indexed As: Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, Re. Federal Court Mactavish, J. December 6, 2012.
In The Matter of an Application by [...] for Warrants Pursuant to Sections 16 and 21 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, R.S.C. 1985, C. C-23 (2012 FC 1437) And In The Matter of [...] Indexed
More informationIndexed As: Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang. Ontario Court of Appeal Hoy, A.C.J.O., Laskin, Sharpe, Cronk and Blair, JJ.A. December 9, 2014.
Royal Bank of Canada (plaintiff/appellant) v. Phat Trang and Phuong Trang a.k.a. Phuong Thi Trang (defendants) and Bank of Nova Scotia (respondent) (C57306; 2014 ONCA 883) Indexed As: Royal Bank of Canada
More informationCase Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board)
Page 1 Case Name: Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board) Cuddy Chicks Limited, appellant; v. Ontario Labour Relations Board and United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. IN THE MATTER OF Section 53 of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26;
Court File No.: 35203 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA IN THE MATTER OF Section 53 of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26; AND IN THE MATTER OF a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning reform
More informationBritish Columbia's Tobacco Litigation and the Rule of Law
The Peter A. Allard School of Law Allard Research Commons Faculty Publications (Emeriti) 2004 British Columbia's Tobacco Litigation and the Rule of Law Robin Elliot Allard School of Law at the University
More informationTHE USE OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND THE ANTI-INFLATION ACT REFERENCE
THE USE OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND THE ANTI-INFLATION ACT REFERENCE R. B. Buglass* One of the more novel aspects of the Anti-Inflation Act Rejerence' relates to the discussion of the use of extrinsic evidence.
More informationDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CANADA
ii DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CANADA 234 Wellington Street, Room 1161 Ottawa, ON K1A 0H8 Telephone: (613) 957-4763 Facsimile: (613) 954-1920 Email: robert.frater@justice.gc.ca Robert J. Frater Christopher M.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: Reference re Senate Reform, 2014 SCC 32 DATE: DOCKET: 35203
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Reference re Senate Reform, 2014 SCC 32 DATE: 20140425 DOCKET: 35203 IN THE MATTER OF a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning reform of the Senate, as set out
More informationHer Majesty the Queen v. Augustus Roderick Hancock (2015 NLPC 1313A00983) Indexed As: R. v. Hancock (A.R.)
Her Majesty the Queen v. Augustus Roderick Hancock (2015 NLPC 1313A00983) Indexed As: R. v. Hancock (A.R.) Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court Gorman, P.C.J. March 2, 2015. Summary: The accused
More informationThe Attorney General for Alberta. The Attorney General of Canada
Reference re Firearms Act (Can.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 783 IN THE MATTER OF Section 27(1) of the Judicature Act, R.S.A. 1980, chapter J-1 AND IN THE MATTER OF a Reference by the Lieutenant Governor in Council
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Miljevic, 2011 SCC 8 DATE: DOCKET: 33714
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Miljevic, 2011 SCC 8 DATE: 20110216 DOCKET: 33714 BETWEEN: Marko Miljevic Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent CORAM: McLachlin C.J. and Deschamps, Fish,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (Manitoba Court of Appeal) APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (Supreme Court Act section 40 R.S., c.5-19, s.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (Manitoba Court of Appeal) File No. BETWEEN: ERNEST LIONEL JOSEPH BLAIS, - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, - and - MÉTIS NATIONAL COUNCIL, Applicant (Accused), Respondent (Informant),
More informationCoram: McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ.
Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ. The following is the judgment delivered by The Court: I. Introduction [1] Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen,
More informationOntario (Attorney General) v. Bear Island Foundation, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 570
Ontario (Attorney General) v. Bear Island Foundation, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 570 The Bear Island Foundation and Gary Potts, William Twain and Maurice McKenzie, Jr. on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all
More informationJudges Act J-1 SHORT TITLE INTERPRETATION. "age of retirement" of a judge means the age, fixed by law, at which the judge ceases to hold office;
Page 1 of 49 Judges Act ( R.S., 1985, c. J-1 ) Disclaimer: These documents are not the official versions (more). Act current to December 29th, 2008 Attention: See coming into force provision and notes,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Transportation and Highways), 2010 SCC 4 BETWEEN: DATE: 20100212 DOCKET: 32460 Tercon Contractors Ltd. Appellant and Her Majesty
More informationIndexed As: Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce et al. v. Deloitte & Touche et al.
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, High River Limited Partnership, Philip Services Corp. by its receiver and manager, Robert Cumming (plaintiffs/appellants) v. Deloitte & Touche, Deloitte & Touche LLP,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE ALBERTA COURT OF APPEAL) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ALBERTA. -and- GILLES CARON
File No.: 33092 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE ALBERTA COURT OF APPEAL) BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ALBERTA -and- Appellant (Appellant) GILLES CARON - and - Respondent
More information1.1.3 Notice of Memorandum of Understanding with the China Securities Regulatory Commission MEMORANDUM
1.1.3 Notice of Memorandum of Understanding with the China Securities Regulatory Commission Memorandum of Understanding with the China Securities Regulatory Commission The Ontario Securities Commission,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. APPEAL HEARD: January 18, 2016 JUDGMENT RENDERED: October 14, 2016 DOCKET: 36165
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Conférence des juges de paix magistrats du Québec v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2016 SCC 39 APPEAL HEARD: January 18, 2016 JUDGMENT RENDERED: October 14, 2016 DOCKET:
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Ronald Jones (respondent) (C52480; 2011 ONCA 632) Indexed As: R. v. Jones (R.)
Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Ronald Jones (respondent) (C52480; 2011 ONCA 632) Indexed As: R. v. Jones (R.) Ontario Court of Appeal MacPherson, Blair and Epstein, JJ.A. October 11, 2011. Summary:
More informationIN THE MATTER OF the Patent Act R.S.C. 1985, c. P-4, as amended. AND IN THE MATTER OF Galderma Canada Inc. (the Respondent ) and the medicine Tactuo
IN THE MATTER OF the Patent Act R.S.C. 1985, c. P-4, as amended AND IN THE MATTER OF Galderma Canada Inc. (the Respondent ) and the medicine Tactuo NOTICE OF HEARING TAKE NOTICE that the Patented Medicine
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. BETWEEN: Kuwait Airways Corporation Appellant and Republic of Iraq and Bombardier Aerospace Respondents
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Kuwait Airways Corp. v. Iraq, 2010 SCC 40 DATE: 20101021 DOCKET: 33145 BETWEEN: Kuwait Airways Corporation Appellant and Republic of Iraq and Bombardier Aerospace Respondents
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Punko, 2012 SCC 39 DATE: DOCKET: 34135, 34193
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Punko, 2012 SCC 39 DATE: 20120720 DOCKET: 34135, 34193 BETWEEN: AND BETWEEN: John Virgil Punko Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Randall Richard Potts
More informationCindy Fulawka (plaintiff/respondent) v. The Bank of Nova Scotia (defendant/appellant) (C54467; 2012 ONCA 443)
Cindy Fulawka (plaintiff/respondent) v. The Bank of Nova Scotia (defendant/appellant) (C54467; 2012 ONCA 443) Indexed As: Fulawka v. Bank of Nova Scotia Ontario Court of Appeal Winkler, C.J.O., Lang and
More informationIndependence, Accountability and Human Rights
NOTE: This article represents the views of the author and not the Department of Justice, Yukon Government. Independence, Accountability and Human Rights by Lorne Sossin 1 As part of the Yukon Human Rights
More informationHer Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Sheldon Stubbs (appellant) (C51351; 2013 ONCA 514) Indexed As: R. v. Stubbs (S.)
Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Sheldon Stubbs (appellant) (C51351; 2013 ONCA 514) Indexed As: R. v. Stubbs (S.) Ontario Court of Appeal Sharpe, Gillese and Watt, JJ.A. August 12, 2013. Summary:
More informationIndexed As: Moore v. Getahun et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Laskin, Sharpe and Simmons, JJ.A. January 29, 2015.
Blake Moore (respondent) v. Dr. Tajedin Getahun, The Scarborough Hospital - General Division, Dr. John Doe and Jack Doe (appellant) (C58338; 2015 ONCA 55) Indexed As: Moore v. Getahun et al. Ontario Court
More informationJ. M. Denis Lavoie Respondent
R. v. Richard, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 525 Her Majesty The Queen Appellant v. Réjean Richard and between Respondent Her Majesty The Queen Appellant v. Léo J. Doiron Respondent and between Her Majesty The Queen
More informationConstitutional Cases 2000: An Overview
The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference Volume 14 (2001) Article 1 Constitutional Cases 2000: An Overview Patrick J. Monahan Osgoode Hall Law School of York University
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Construction Labour Relations v. Driver Iron Inc., 2012 SCC 65 DATE: 20121129 DOCKET: 34205 BETWEEN: Construction Labour Relations - An Alberta Association Appellant and
More informationOBSERVATION. TD Economics A DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLES IN CANADA
OBSERVATION TD Economics May 1, 213 A DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLES IN CANADA Highlights New data from the National Household Survey (NHS) show that just over 1.4 million people identified
More informationA CLASS ACTION BLUEPRINT FOR ALBERTA
A CLASS ACTION BLUEPRINT FOR ALBERTA By William E. McNally and Barbara E. Cotton 1 2 Interesting things have been happening in Alberta recently regarding class action proceedings. Alberta is handicapped
More informationCASL Constitutional Challenge An Overview
McCarthy Tétrault Advance Building Capabilities for Growth CASL Constitutional Challenge An Overview Charles Morgan Direct Line: 514-397-4230 E-Mail: cmorgan@mccarthy.ca October 24, 2016 Overview Freedom
More informationIndexed As: Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. Federal Court Mactavish, J. April 18, 2012.
Canadian Human Rights Commission (applicant) v. Attorney General of Canada, First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, Assembly of First Nations, Chiefs of Ontario, Amnesty International (respondents)
More informationIndexed As: Iamkhong v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) et al. Federal Court Noël, J. March 24, 2011.
Suwalee Iamkhong (applicant) v. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (respondents) (IMM-3693-10; 2011 FC 355) Indexed As: Iamkhong v.
More informationConstitutional Cases 2005: An Overview
The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference Volume 34 (2006) Article 1 Constitutional Cases 2005: An Overview Patrick J. Monahan Osgoode Hall Law School of York University
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Halifax (Regional Municipality) v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), 2012 SCC 10 DATE: 20120316 DOCKET: 33651 BETWEEN: Halifax Regional Municipality, a body corporate
More informationPartners of the Pathways to Prosperity Partnership
Partners of the Pathways to Prosperity Partnership Universities Universities... 2 University- based Centres... 2 Settlement Organizations Service Providers... 2 Service Provider Umbrellas... 3 Research
More informationTO : THE JUDICIAL COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS COMMISSION 2007
TO : THE JUDICIAL COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS COMMISSION 2007 COMMENTS WITH RESPECT TO DOCUMENTS RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSION REGARDING THE SUBMISSION FOR A SALARY DIFFERENTIAL FOR JUDGES OF COURTS OF APPEAL
More informationNOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION
TRIBUNAL NUMBERS T1073/5405 and T1074/5505 CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL BETWEEN: RICHARD WARMAN COMPLAINANT AND CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AND COMMISSION MARC LEMIRE and THE FREEDOMSITE RESPONDENTS
More informationFebruary 23, Dear Ms. Ursulescu, Re: Legislative Model for Lobbying in Saskatchewan
February 23, 2012 Stacey Ursulescu, Committees Branch Standing Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs and Justice Room 7, 2405 Legislative Drive Regina, SK S4S 0B3 Dear Ms. Ursulescu, Re: Legislative Model
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Caron, 2011 SCC 5 DATE: DOCKET: 33092
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Caron, 2011 SCC 5 DATE: 20110204 DOCKET: 33092 BETWEEN: Her Majesty The Queen in Right of the Province of Alberta Appellant and Gilles Caron Respondent - and - Commissioner
More informationIndexed As: Lockridge et al. v. Ontario (Minister of Environment) et al.
Ada Lockridge and Ronald Plain (applicants) v. Director, Ministry of the Environment, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, as Represented by the Minister of the Environment, the Attorney General
More informationNOTICE MUTUAL RELIANCE REVIEW SYSTEM MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
NOTICE MUTUAL RELIANCE REVIEW SYSTEM MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Introduction The Ontario Securities Commission, together with the other members of the Canadian Securities Administrators (the "CSA") is
More informationIndexed As: Thibodeau v. Air Canada. Federal Court of Appeal Pelletier, Gauthier and Trudel, JJ.A. September 25, 2012.
Air Canada (appellant) v. Michel Thibodeau and Lynda Thibodeau (respondents) and The Commissioner of Official Languages (intervener) (A-358-11; 2012 FCA 246; 2012 CAF 246) Indexed As: Thibodeau v. Air
More informationResearch Branch MR-18E. Mini-Review COMMERCIAL SIGNS IN QUEBEC: THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. Jean-Charles Ducharme Law and Government Division
Mini-Review MR-18E COMMERCIAL SIGNS IN QUEBEC: THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS Jean-Charles Ducharme Law and Government Division 19 December 1988 Library of Parliament Bibliotheque du Parlement Research Branch
More informationIMPORTANT EXPLANATORY NOTE:
ELLYNLAW.COM IMPORTANT EXPLANATORY NOTE: The following article was published in 1994 in the National Law Journal http://www.law.com. Although the legal principles in it are still applicable, there has
More informationAlberta Immigrant Highlights. Labour Force Statistics. Highest unemployment rate for landed immigrants 9.8% New immigrants
2016 Labour Force Profiles in the Labour Force Immigrant Highlights Population Statistics Labour Force Statistics Third highest percentage of landed immigrants in the working age population 1. 34. ON 2.
More informationAnwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al Doc Att. 19 EXHIBIT 40. Dockets.Justia.com
Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al Doc. 1048 Att. 19 EXHIBIT 40 Dockets.Justia.com DOMINION LAW REPORTS (FOURTH SERIES) A WEEKLY SERIES OF REPORTS OF CASES FROM ALL THE COURTS OF CANADA Vol.
More informationGrade 8 Social Studies Citizenship Test Part 1 Name Matching Shade in the box beside the BEST answer.
Grade 8 Social Studies Citizenship Test Part 1 Name Matching Shade in the box beside the BEST answer. 1. Who are the founding peoples of Canada? Métis, French and British. Aboriginal, Métis and British.
More informationArsenault-Cameron v. Prince Edward Island, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 3
Arsenault-Cameron v. Prince Edward Island, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 3 Noëlla Arsenault-Cameron, Madeleine Costa-Petitpas and the Fédération des Parents de l Île-du-Prince-Édouard Inc. Appellants v. The Government
More informationIndexed As: Kandola v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Federal Court of Appeal Noël, Mainville and Webb, JJ.A. March 31, 2014.
The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (appellant) v. Nanakmeet Kaur Kandola by her guardian at law Malkiat Singh Kandola (respondent) (A-154-13; 2014 FCA 85) Indexed As: Kandola v. Canada (Minister
More informationThe Effect of the Quebec Official Language Act on Federal Corporations Daniel Ish* I. Introduction
The Effect of the Quebec Official Language Act on Federal Corporations Daniel Ish* I. Introduction In July 1974, the Quebec Official Language Act received Royal assent. The Act contains many broad provisions
More informationIndexed As: Ouellette v. Saint-André (Rural Community) New Brunswick Court of Appeal Larlee, Richard and Bell, JJ.A. March 14, 2013.
Gisèle Ouellette (applicant/appellant) v. Saint-André, an incorporated Rural Community (respondent) (89-12-CA; 2013 NBCA 21) Indexed As: Ouellette v. Saint-André (Rural Community) New Brunswick Court of
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Court of Appeal File No. C65807 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO IN THE MATTER OF A REFERENCE to the Court of Appeal pursuant to section 8 of the Courts of Justice Act, RSO 1990, c. C.34, by Order-in-Council
More informationcanadian udicial conduct the council canadian council and the role of the Canadian Judicial Council
canadian udicial conduct the council canadian judicial of judges and the role of the council Canadian Judicial Council Canadian Judicial Council Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W8 Tel.: (613) 288-1566 Fax: (613)
More informationSUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Emms, 2012 SCC 74 DATE: DOCKET: 34087
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Emms, 2012 SCC 74 DATE: 20121221 DOCKET: 34087 BETWEEN: James Peter Emms Appellant and Her Majesty the Queen Respondent - and - Canadian Civil Liberties Association,
More informationCanada s Visible Minorities: Andrew Cardozo and Ravi Pendakur
Canada s Visible Minorities: 1967-2017 Andrew Cardozo and Ravi Pendakur Introduction Introductory remarks Demographic overview Labour market outcomes Policy initiatives Some defining moments Demographic
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT S.N.B and - IN THE MATTER OF
IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT S.N.B. 2004 - and - IN THE MATTER OF INTERCONTINENTAL TRADING GROUP S.A., RON WALLACE AND GARY MCCORY (RESPONDENTS) Date of Hearing: November 18, 2009 Date of Order:
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL LAW Fall 2015
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Fall 2015 JENNA DAVIS THOMPSON RIVERS UNIVERSITY LAWF 3010 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents... 1 Introduction to Constitutional Law... 4 Sources of Law... 4 Three Branches of Government...
More informationDoing Business in Canada and the Judicial Review of Wrongful Government Statutory and Regulatory Action
Canada-United States Law Journal Volume 7 Issue Article 4 January 1984 Doing Business in Canada and the Judicial Review of Wrongful Government Statutory and Regulatory Action Gordon F. Henderson Emilio
More informationR. v. Ferguson, 2008
R. v. Ferguson, 2008 RCMP Constable Michael Ferguson was convicted by a jury of manslaughter in an Alberta court in 2004. Ferguson was involved in a scuffle with a detainee in a police detachment cell
More information