36396   Christopher Michael Staetter v. Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Services, Attorney General of British Columbia

Criminal Law – Whether applicant raises a legal issue.

On appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia. Mr. Staetter was charged with counts of uttering threats and criminal harassment. He was declared not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder and referred to the British Columbia Review Board. The Board issued a custodial order. In 2014, the Board re-assessed Mr. Staetter and remanded him for a further 12 months. The appeal from that decision was dismissed.

36360   C.P. v. RBC Life Insurance Company

Insurance – Personal Insurance – Mental distress damages – Punitive damages

On appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia. From 2006 to 2009, CP collected disability benefits for loss of income due to illness from RBC Life Insurance Company. In July 2009, she notified RBC that she anticipated a return to full-time work by September 1, 2009. On July 15, 2009, RBC erroneously implemented an internal procedure called Advance Pay and Close pursuant to which it paid benefits until September 1, 2009. However, CP did not return to full-time work and RBC did not re-open her claim. RBC acknowledges that it failed to follow requirements under its policy and it exacerbated the situation by treating CP’s requests for benefits after the claim was closed as an appeal. In April 2010, RBC re-opened CP’s claim. CP obtained damages for mental distress during the eight-month period in which the claim was closed. Her claim for punitive damages was dimissed. The Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed the appeal.

36444   D.J.S. v. Her Majesty the Queen

Criminal law – Sentencing – Dangerous offender designation

On appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia. The applicant, age 69, was convicted on two charges of sexual assault. He has a lengthy criminal record, which includes many sexual assaults. He was diagnosed with a pedophilic disorder, alcohol use disorder and antisocial and narcissistic traits. The applicant was declared a dangerous offender. After allowing appropriate credits for time spent in pre-hearing custody, he received a net global sentence of 19.5 months in custody and a ten-year long-term supervision order. The Court of Appeal allowed the sentencing appeal and imposed an indeterminate sentence.

36353    Lynne M. Quarmby, et al. v. Attorney General of Canada, et al.

Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Freedom of expression – Right to life – Right to security of the person

On appeal from a judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal. Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC applied to the National Energy Board for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to expand its oil pipeline infrastructure between Alberta and British Columbia. As part of its review process, the Board conducted an environmental assessment and held a public hearing. 2,118 parties applied to participate in the hearing. 1198 requests to participate were granted. 452 requests for intervener status were granted commenter status. 468 applications were denied. One of the applicants was granted intervener status, three were granted commenter status, seven were denied participation, and Ms. Quarmby did not apply. The Board dismissed a motion by the applicants asserting in part that s. 2(b) of theCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was infringed by the Board’s test for standing and its decisions on participation. It dismissed a procedural motion requesting an oral hearing of the Chartermotion. The Board also dismissed arguments that its Application to Participate process, its Ruling on Participation, and its List of Issues for the hearing breached s. 2(b) of the Charter.

The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the applicants’ application for leave to appeal.

36461   Robert Semenoff, Executor of the Estate of Bill Semenoff, Deceased v. Lewis J. Bridgeman, Marion Demosky and Michael William Semenoff

Civil procedure – Appeals

On appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia. The Applicant, Robert Semenoff is the executor of the estate of Bill Semenoff, deceased.  The Respondent, Lewis Bridgeman was Bill Semenoff’s lawyer at one time. The third parties are Michael Semenoff and Marion Demosky, siblings of Bill Semenoff. Robert Semenoff alleges that Mr. Bridgeman was negligent in providing legal services to Bill Semenoff in 1987 and 1990. 

Robert Semenoff’s case was dismissed on the basis that the evidence was insufficient to support the claim. The subsequent appeal was stayed as Robert Semenoff was ordered to post security for costs for the appeal. Security for costs were posted, but the appeal was later moved to the inactive list. Robert Semenoff’s application to remove his appeal from the inactive list was dismissed as was his application for review of this decision.

36367   Steve Côté v. Fédération des producteurs acéricoles du Québec, Attorney General of Quebec

           - and between -

             9167-1537 Québec Inc., et al. v. Fédération des producteurs acéricoles du Québec, Attorney General of Quebec

Civil procedure – Provisional remedies – Seizures before judgment

On appeal from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal. Given the applicants’ refusal to comply with the rules set by the respondent, the respondent had a significant quantity of maple syrup seized from each of the applicant producers before judgment, pursuant to art. 734 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The applicants applied to the Quebec Superior Court and the Quebec Court of Appeal to have the seizure quashed but were unsuccessful.

36423    Frederic Ntibarimungu v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia

Insurance – Automobile insurance – Disability benefits

On appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia. The applicant is a self represented litigant who sustained injuries in a motor-vehicle accident on December 23, 2007. He has qualifications in payroll management, human resources, life insurance and teaching and was working at the Vancouver Career College at the time of the accident. He brought an action for disability benefits under Part 7 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Regulation, B.C. Reg. 447/83, asserting that he had been totally disabled by the accident. The Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed his action, holding that the applicant had established he was disabled for a period of ten weeks, but had failed to make-out a prima facie case that he continued to be disabled from his pre-accident employment and occupation. The Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed the applicant’s appeal.