36862 Malakias Gerald Swales v. Her Majesty the Queen
Criminal law – Evidence – Assessment
Police observed the applicant driving a convoluted route in tandem with a truck to an apartment building and parked in front. The applicant used a fob to enter the building and returned three minutes later with a bag, which he threw into the back seat of the truck. Inside the bag were four kilograms of cocaine. The applicant then evaded police in a high speed chase. The police discovered that the fob was connected to an apartment that was a stash house for drugs and weapons. The applicant’s brother testified that the applicant was unaware that the apartment contained drugs and weapons. The applicant was convicted on 26 counts. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application to reopen the appeal.
36807 Taseko Mines Limited v. Minister of the Environment, Attorney General of Canada, Federal Review Panel, Tsilhqot'in National Government, Joey Alphonse, on his own behalf and on behalf of all members of the Tsilhqot'in Nation
Administrative Law – Boards and tribunals – Natural justice
Taseko Mines Ltd. (“Taseko”) proposed the development of a gold-copper mine project. The proposed project was subject to an assessment by a federal review panel. The review panel conducted extensive public hearings and, after the conclusion of the hearings, issued a report, concluding that the project would result in significant adverse environmental effects. The report was prepared by the secretariat to the review panel, composed of members of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Taseko applied for judicial review of the review panel’s assessment on various grounds, including a breach of procedural fairness. In support of its application, Taseko sought, among others, the production of exchanges between the review panel and its secretariat concerning the drafting of the report. The Federal Court allowed the motion for production in part. The Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the subsequent appeals.
36749 Slawomir Poplawski v. McGill University
(Que.) (Civil) (By Leave)
Charter of Rights – Fundamental justice – Employment law
The respondent terminated the applicant’s employment in 2010. In 2013, the applicant brought a motion to introduce proceedings for an unjust dismissal suit. The respondent brought a motion seeking to dismiss the introductory motion, for lack of jurisdiction, given that an arbitrator held exclusive jurisdiction over issues related to the termination of employment. On August 5, 2014, the Superior Court of Quebec granted the respondent’s motion and dismissed the applicant’s proceedings. The applicant then sought to revoke or nullify the August 5th judgment, and brought a motion seeking the recusal of the presiding judge hearing his revocation motion; both motions were dismissed. The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s motions seeking permission to appeal the Superior Court judgments, as well as his original motions seeking the revocation of the initial judgments and the recusal of the presiding judge. Successive Court of Appeal judgments dismissed similar subsequent motions filed by the applicant.
36859 Ade Olumide v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Fundamental justice – Taxation
The Minister of National Revenue determined the applicant was not eligible for GST rebates under the Excise Tax Act. The applicant brought a motion for leave to file a judicial review application of these decisions along with other motions to the Federal Court. They were dismissed. The applicant brought a second motion to the Federal Court for clarification of the first order. The judge refused to clarify his first order. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal of the two orders. The applicant also brought a motion before the Federal Court of Appeal for declaratory relief that was dismissed. The Federal Court dismissed the motion for leave to file judicial review application. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and motion for declaratory relief.
36860 Ade Olumide v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Cruel and Unusual treatment or punishment – Taxation
The Tax Court dismissed an appeal by the applicant from a notice of assessment in which the Minister of National Revenue denied applications for rebates of GST paid by the applicant and his wife in 2009, pursuant to the Excise Tax Act, as a consequence of purchasing residential real estate. This order was not appealed by Mr. Olumide.
In another order, the Tax Court quashed an application by the applicant to vacate certain court costs against him and extend the time to appeal to the Tax Court against an assessment and reconsideration and reassessment of a GST rebate.
A further application was sought by the applicant for a wide variety of relief and an oral hearing. The Tax Court denied both the request for an oral hearing and dismissed the application. An application to reopen or reconsider these two orders was also dismissed.
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and dismissed a motion for declaratory relief.
36861 Ade Olumide v. Conservative Party of Canada
Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Fundamental justice – Constitutional law
The applicant sought to be a candidate for the respondent, Conservative Party of Canada in the 2015 federal election in the riding of Kanata-Carleton. His candidacy was rejected by the Party and that decision was upheld during the Party’s internal appeal process. The applicant applied to the Federal Court for a motion and judicial review alleging bias and violations of procedural fairness.
The Federal Court found it lacked jurisdiction to hear the application as the respondent was not a federal board, commission or other tribunal within the meaning of s. 18 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7.
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and dismissed a subsequent motion to vary that order.
36845 Ryan Sean Milliken v. Her Majesty the Queen
Criminal law – Evidence
On January 24, 2012, two movies containing child pornography were made available on a peer-to-peer file sharing network and downloaded by police. The movies were made available by the IP address associated with the internet account used by the applicant and his parents at their home in Brockville. On February 13, 2012, police executed a search warrant and seized the applicant’s laptop from his room. The desktop had 10 icons that linked to child pornography movies. A forensic examination of the computer showed that it contained 101 still images and 115 movies of child pornography. The applicant was convicted of possessing child pornography relating to the February 13 incident. He was acquitted of three counts related to possession, accessing, and sharing child pornography on January 24, 2012. The applicant was sentenced to five months’ imprisonment. The applicant’s conviction appeal was dismissed.
36802 Alexandre Turcotte, Sylvain Turcotte, Lucia Pearson and Frédéric Turcotte v. Pierre-Luc Dufour, Dave Paradis, Sports D.R.C. (1991) Inc., Jean-François Turcotte and Union canadienne, compagnie d'assurances
Maritime law ‒ Liability in tort ‒ Collision between two pleasure craft
In August 2008, two pleasure craft collided in a buoyed channel of the Grande-Décharge River in Alma, Province of Quebec. The collision is alleged to have been caused by a 180-degree turn performed by respondent Jean-François Turcotte, who was at the helm of the pleasure craft at the time. The manoeuvre resulted in immobilizing his vessel in front of the vessel operated by respondent Pierre-Luc Dufour and in blinding Mr. Dufour by splashing a large amount of water on his windshield thus preventing him from avoiding the collision. As a result of the collision, respondent Jean-François Turcotte and applicant Alexandre Turcotte were seriously injured, and one of the passengers, Pierre Turcotte, died. The Quebec Superior Court allowed the action in marine liability against the respondent Jean-François Turcotte. The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
36835 Michael Mikhail, Mary Mikhail, Adly Mikhail v. Oxford Dodge Chrysler Jeep (1992) Ltd., James Bennett
Torts – Civil procedure – Motion for summary judgment
The applicants purchased a car from Downsview Chrysler in Toronto for $45,418.44. Downsview obtained the car from the respondent dealer Oxford Dodge in London, which is managed by the respondent James Bennett. The car’s air conditioner malfunctioned and the applicants brought an action seeking over $400,000 in damages against the respondent and the Downsview defendants. The claims were settled with all Defendants except the Respondents. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted the summary judgment and dismissed the applicant’s claim against the respondent. The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the appeal.
36838 Comité paritaire de l’industrie des services automobiles de la région de Montréal (CPA Montréal) v. Northbridge General Insurance Corporation (formerly known as Lombard General Insurance Company of Canada)
Insurance – Property insurance – Employee fidelity coverage
In May 2009, the applicant noted anomalies in its payroll records, which revealed that an employee had embezzled almost two million dollars since 1989. The applicant had been insured against employee dishonesty with the respondent since June 1, 1998, for a maximum amount of $100,000.00. The applicant therefore filed a claim with the respondent.
The respondent refused to compensate the applicant on the ground that the exclusion in the insurance policies was applicable here, given that the employee’s actions were perpetrated in the normal course of his employment. In the alternative, the respondent submitted that only the maximum amount could be claimed since the employee’s fraud had to be viewed as a single loss and that the amount claimed could therefore not be accumulated with each renewal of the insurance policy during the period the fraud was committed. Before the courts, the applicant claimed compensation in the amount of $1,035,000.00 from the respondent. The Quebec Superior Court allowed the action in part and the respondent is ordered to pay $100,000.00 and indemnity. The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals.
36888 Mariam Ocsko v. Her Majesty the Queen
Criminal law – Arrest – Applicant convicted of obstructing the course of justice
The trial judge found that Ms. Ocsko used the Saskatchewan driver’s license issued on October 25th, 2011 in her married name, with an expiry date of October 25th, 2016, in order to obstruct, pervert, or defeat the course of justice. During a traffic stop, it came to light that there was a warrant out for the applicant’s arrest for failing to appear to be sentenced for a fraud conviction. The trial judge found that the applicant specifically intended to mislead Constable Ring in order to hide her identity. The applicant was convicted of obstructing the course of justice. The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal.
36840 Dimitra Panagopoulou v. Attorney General of Canada
Prescription – Extinctive prescription – Preliminary exceptions
The applicant wishes to sue the respondent for damages caused to her in an investigation report that was issued and considered final in 2005. She contests the lower courts’ decisions to find her case to be time-barred despite the recent involvement of an Ombudsman. Indeed, the lower courts found that the respondent’s involvement in the process with the Ombudsman was not a tacit renunciation to the acquired prescription. The Superior Court of Quebec granted the motion for dismissal and dismissed the action. The Court of Appeal of Quebec dismissed the appeal.
36863 F. Berardini Inc. v. Natrel Inc., Agropur Coopérative
- and between -
F. Berardini Inc., Fernando Berardini v. Natrel Inc., Agropur Coopérative
Civil procedure – Appeal
The applicant F. Berardini Inc., a distributor in the dairy industry, did business with the respondent Agropur Coopérative, a company operating as a milk processor. The applicant and its president, Fernando Berardini, alleged that the respondent had taken away a major portion of the applicant’s clients by giving the applicant poor‑quality products to distribute and by offering those clients more substantial discounts to do business directly with the respondent. In a separate action, the respondent claimed from the applicant the discounts given to retailers’ parent companies to maintain their volume of purchases. In a cross demand, the applicant sought to be reimbursed for certain discounts given to the parent companies. The Quebec Superior Court allowed the actions in part. The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal on a motion to dismiss appeal.
36879 Ade Olumide v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario
Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Fundamental justice – Constitutional law
The applicant commenced action against the decision to adopt an electronic payment system for public transit users in Ontario called PRESTO. The motions and appeals relating to this action were dismissed by the lower courts.
36873 F. Mary Mikhail, Michael Mikhail v. Kenneth E. Howie, David R. Tenszen
Civil procedure – Pleadings – Motions
The applicants were involved in a medical malpractice suit that was allegedly settled in 2001. They commenced an action in negligence against their former solicitors in 2007. The applicants sought to add the respondents’ law firm as party defendant to their action and to re-cross-examine a lawyer who had represented that law firm on his affidavit. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed the applicants’ motions. The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the applicants’ application for leave to appeal.
36901 Tido Lu, Yung-Tsun Wu and Tony Kock Yin v. Chinese Kuomingtang of Canada (Montreal Branch) Inc., Chinese Nationalist League of Canada (Montreal Branch), Charles Ho
- and between -
77th Executive Committee of the Montreal Chinese Nationalist League v. Charles Ho Hsiang-Hie, Hsih Hsiu Fong, Henry Wu, Yu-Shia Sheh, Min-Kong Wong, Kun-Ming Lee, Chi-Sanh Chang, Ta-Chi Chi
- and -
Chack-Sang Lee, Bryant Chang, Eric Jon, Registraire des entreprises du Québec, Chinese Nationalist League of Canada (Montreal Branch)
Property – Immovable – Ownership
The parties dispute the ownership by control of shares of a building in Montreal belonging to the Montreal Chinese Nationalist League Real Estate Company Limited (“the Corporation”). In one case, locks of the buildings were changed and a motion of eviction was filed. In the other case, an action in damages was initiated, alleging damages to the Corporation for violation of its right to peaceful enjoyment and free disposition of its property, and asking the enterprise registrar to rectify its records. The Superior Court of Quebec dismissed the motion of eviction, granted the claim for damages in part and rectified the enterprise registrar’s records. The Court of Appeal of Quebec dismissed the appeal.