JUNE 20 – AUGUST 28, 2012.
Here’s a super-tight summary of all appeals and all leaves to appeal. For leaves I’ve specifically added in both the date the SCC granted leave and the date of the CA judgment.
If you’d like previous reports so you’re right-up-to-date, or if you’d like an electronic copy (so you can click n’ go) email me: emeehan@supremeadvocacy.ca
APPEALS
R. v. Bellusci (Que.CA November 18, 2010) (34054) Aug. 3, 2012
Continuation of a trial will not always be preferable or even possible, and can properly be made only where interests of justice require.
R. v. Walle (Alta. CA, Dec. 13, 2010) (34080) July 27, 2012
Where a judge believes an accused was fully aware of consequences, a “common sense inference” can be read.
R. v. Punko (BCCA, Feb. 10, 2011) (34135, 34193) July 20, 2012
The Crown is not estopped from proving something because it was decided adversely to the Crown in a prior jury trial.
R. v. Vu (BCCA, Mar. 11. 2011)(34286) July 26, 2012
Kidnapping is a continuing offence.
R. v. Venneri (Que. CA, Oct. 6, 2011) (34523) July 6, 2012
“In association with” captures offences that advance, at least to some degree, the interests of a criminal organization.
R. v. Mayuran (Que. CA, Oct. 4, 2011) (34526) June 28, 2012
A defence should only be put to the jury if it has an “air of reality”.
DWK v. R.(BCCA, Aug. 26, 2010) (33911) July 31, 2012
The fitness of probation orders in particular cases are best left to be dealt with by the courts on a case-by-case basis.
Westmount v. Rossy (Que. CA, Nov. 27, 2010) (34060) June 22, 2012
An accident arising out of the use of a vehicle as a means of transportation will fall within the definition of a MV “accident”.
Alberta v. CCLA (Fed. CA, July 23, 2010) (33888) July 12, 2012
Photocopies made by teachers as part of class instruction can qualify as fair dealing under the Copyright Act.
Entertainment Software Association v. SOCAN (Fed. CA Sept. 2, 2010) (33921) July 12, 2012
The Copyright Board’s conclusion that a separate “communication” tariff applied to downloads of musical works violates the principle of technological neutrality”.
Sound v. Motion Picture Theatre Associations of Canada (Fed. CA Feb. 25, 2011) (34210) July 12, 2012
A pre-existing sound recording that is part of a soundtrack cannot be the subject of a tariff when the soundtrack accompanies the cinematographic work.
Rogers v. SOCAN (Fed. CA, Sept. 2, 2010) (33922) July 12, 2012
The transmission of any file containing a musical work from an online service’s website to a customer at the customer’s request, constitutes “communicat[ing] the work to the public by telecommunication”.
SOCAN v. Bell (Fed. CA, May 14, 2010) (33800) July 12, 2012
Previews satisfy the requirements of fair dealing and online service providers do not infringe copyright.
Clements v. Clements (BCCA, Dec. 17, 2010) (34100) June 29, 2012
The basic rule of recovery: the “but for” test. Exceptionally, “material contribution”.
Club Resorts v. Van Breda (Ont. CA, February 2, 2010) (33692, 33606) April 18, 2012
Litigation arising from holiday accidents in Cuba can be commenced in Ontario.
Éditions Écosociété v. Banro (Ont. CA, June 7, 2010)(33819) April 18, 2012
A corporation based in Quebec can, in this case, be sued in Ontario.
Breeden v. Black (Ont. CA, August 13, 2010) (33900) April 18, 2012
Six libel actions, though with U.S. connections, can be continued in Ontario.
Canada v. Craig (Fed. CA, Jan. 21, 2011) (34144) Aug. 1, 2012
The SCC can overrule a prior SCC decision. Farming, in combination with a law practice, can be a chief source of income, so that the loss deduction limitation in s. 31(1) of the Income Tax Act does not apply.
LEAVES TO APPEAL GRANTED
When some defendants enter into proportionate share settlement agreements do these have to be disclosed?
Sable Offshore Energy, et al. v. Ameron International, et al. (NS CA, Dec. 22, 2011) (34678) June 28, 2012
How should new Rule 20 be interpreted?
Bruno Appliance v. Hryniak (Ont. CA, Dec. 5, 2011) (34645) June 28, 2012
Hryniak v. Mauldin, et al (Ont. CA, Dec. 5, 2011) (34641) June 28, 2012
Can a successor corporation change employee insurance plans?
Vivendi v. Dell’Aniello (Que. CA, Feb. 29, 2012) (34800) Aug. 9, 2012
Can a class action be certified for “market timing” losses?
AIC, et al. v. Fischer, et al. (Ont. CA, Jan. 27, 2012) (34738) June 28, 2012
Does eyewitness ID and circumstantial evidence confirm a second shooter?
Hay v. R. (Ont. CA, May 12, 2009) (33536) July 19, 2012
Can the Czech Republic extradite on charges alleged committed nine years before.
AG Canada v. Zajicek (Ont. CA, Feb. 14, 2012) (34767) June 28, 2012
EXTRADITION
There is a publication ban (involving the extradition to Canada of a Canadian national living in India).
R. v. EFM (NS C.A., Dec. 8, 2011) (34650) June 28, 2012
What is the legal status (and damages) of a forestry licence in a location later declared to be a provincial park?
BC v. Teal Cedar Products (BCCA, Feb. 13, 2012) (34769) July 26, 2012
Who is a “broker” in Quebec law?
Sovereign General Insurance v. Autorité des marchés financiers (Que. CA, Jan. 10, 2012) (34699)
What is the regulatory regime with respect to the rights and duties of police officers involved in SIU investigations?
Police Constable Wood, et al. v. Schaeffer, et al. (Ont. CA, Nov. 15, 2011) (34621) June 28, 2012
What is the limitation period for securities offences?
McLean v. Exec. Dir. of BC Securities Commission (BCCA, Nov. 10, 2011) (34593) June 28, 2012
How is CCA to be calculated in a corporate amalgamation?
Envision Credit Union v. R. (Fed. CA, Nov. 21, 2011) (34619) June 21, 2012
About the Author
Eugen Meehan, Q.C., is a litigation partner at Supreme Advocacy LLP, Ottawa. emeehan@supremeadvocacy.ca