Bankruptcy and Insolvency/Tax: Priorities

Attorney General of Canada v. Richter Inc. (formely Richter Advisory Group Inc.), et al., 2023 QCCA 1295 (41043)
Two debtor companies owed over $3.1M in unremitted source deductions, pursuant to federal and provincial legislation. The federal Crown’s claim for source deductions was protected by the Income Tax Act (“ITA”) through a statutory deemed trust mechanism. Faced with liquidity problems, the debtors sought protection from creditors, including the Respondent Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, under the proposal provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, with the Respondent Richter Inc. named as proposed trustee. The debtors also filed a motion for relief, including the granting of certain “priming” charges (a charge for interim financing; an administration charge; and a directors’ and officers’ charge). The application judge at the Superior Court of Québec ordered that the three priming charges ranked in priority over all other interests, including any deemed trust in favour of the Crown pursuant to the ITA. The Qué. C.A. dismissed Canada’s and Québec’s appeals. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”
 

Class Actions: RCMP

Diane BigEagle v. R., 2023 FCA 128 (40910)
This Leave is in regard to the Fed. C.A. T.D. declining to certify a class action (as to unsolved murders of Indigenous women and two-spirited individuals, reported to the RCMP), which appeal the Fed. C.A. dismissed. “The motion for an extension of time to serve and file the application for leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Construction Law: Concrete

Atkinsréalis Canada Inc. (formerly known as SNC-Lavalin Inc.), et al. v. Lafarge Canada inc., et al., 2023 QCCA 939 (40923)
The Québec Superior Cout declared defendants liable in solidum for damage to 857 residential buildings, as to concrete quality/content. Issues include: presumption of truth of the findings of a prior judicial decision; legal standard to be used re errors of omission by technical professionals; rules of evidence governing evaluation of alleged mistakes; rules of natural justice. The Qué. C.A. dismissed the appeal. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”
 

Criminal Law: Sentencing

Olson v. R., 2023 BCCA 430 (41097)
This Leave concerns sentencing issues, including: Gladue principles; totality principle; consecutive v. concurrent. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Employment Law: Accommodation

Kevin Haynes v. Attorney General of Canada, 2023 FCA 158 (41047)
Mr. Haynes requested accommodation from his employer, Employment and Social Development Canada. When adequate accommodations were not made, he filed four complaints alleging harassment, discrimination and failure to accommodate his autism. An independent investigator conducted an investigation and concluded the complaints were substantiated in part. The official within Employment and Social Development Canada designated to receive harassment complaints accepted the findings. Mr. Haynes applied for judicial review of the designated official’s decision. The Federal Court dismissed the application. The Fed. C.A. dismissed an appeal. “The motion for an extension of time to serve and file the application for leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Extradition: MVA Charges

Barnes v. Attorney General of Canada, on behalf of the United States of America, 2023 ONCA 492 (41115)
Applicant Jaedyin Riquan Barnes is a Canadian citizen. The U.S. formally requested Mr. Barnes’ extradition for grand theft auto (an actual MV, not the video game), vehicular homicide, and manslaughter while driving under the influence. Mr. Barnes was injured in the MVA in Florida that gave rise to the charges. The Minister of Justice ordered Mr. Barnes’ surrender for extradition. Mr. Barnes sought judicial review of the Minister’s order. The Ont. C.A. dismissed Mr. Barnes’ judicial review application. “The motion for an extension of time to serve and file the application for leave to appeal is granted. The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Military Law: Judges

Corporal (Ret’d) Ryan Wade Cookson v. R., 2023 CMAC 8 (40845)
The Applicant is a member of the Canadian Armed Forces who had charges laid against him. The Standing Court Martial found the Applicant guilty of one charge of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline contrary to s. 129 of the National Defence Act. The Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada dismissed the Applicant’s appeal, which raised the issues of whether the Code of Service Discipline applies to military judges and whether they can be tried through courts martial, for substantially the same reasons set out in R. v. Remington, 2023 CMAC 3. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Military Law: Judges

Naval Cadet Remington v. R., 2023 CMAC 3 (40642)
There is a publication ban in this case, certain information not available to the public, in the context of the constitutionality of courts martial re s. 11(d). “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Military Law: Judges

Sergeant V.N.E. Turner v. R., 2023 CMAC 6 (40779)
The Applicant is a member of the Canadian Armed Forces. The Standing Court Martial found the Applicant guilty of one charge of sexual assault contrary to s. 271 of the Criminal Code, punishable via s. 130 of the National Defence Act. The Applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for nine months and a reduction in rank to sergeant. The Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada dismissed his appeal including, for substantially the same reasons set out in R. v. Remington, 2023 CMAC 3, the issues of whether the Code of Service Discipline applies to military judges and whether they can be tried through courts martial re s. 11(d) Charter. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Military Law: Judges

Soldat Mohammad El Zein v. R., 2023 CMAC 9 (40919)
There is a publication ban in this case, certain information not available to the public, in the context of the constitutionality of courts martial re s. 11(d). “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
 

Municipal Law: Religious Exemptions

Ville de Boisbriand v. Hassidic Religious Community Centre, 2023 QCCA 1301 (41046)
The Respondent, the Hassidic Religious Community Centre (HRCC), a non profit organization, owned multiple buildings in Ville de Boisbriand (City), the Applicant. The HRCC filed nine applications with the Administrative Tribunal of Québec (ATQ) for a tax exemption for nine buildings, in whole or in part, which were entered on the City’s three year assessment roll for 2014, 16 in accordance with s. 204(12), (14)(c) and (17) of the Act respecting municipal taxation. The ATQ dismissed the exemption applications because, among other things, the use of the buildings in question by the HRCC was not as described in s. 204(12) of the AMT since the HRCC exercised only a power of detention in respect of them. The ATQ also found that the HRCC is not a religious institution within the meaning of s. 204(12) and (14) of the AMT. Furthermore, the ATQ also declared parts that already benefitted from a tax exemption to be taxable even though those exemptions were not contested by the City and therefore no debate took place on the issue. The ATQ’s decision was the subject of an appeal to the Court of Québec pursuant to s. 159 of the Act respecting administrative justice, with respect to six buildings: a school for boys, for the part being used as classrooms; a school for boys, for the part being used as a synagogue; a childcare centre for girls; a childcare centre for boys; and two schools for girls. The Court of Québec set aside the ATQ’s decision and found that all could benefit from the exemption sought. The Superior Court dismissed the City’s application for judicial review of the Court of Québec’s decision. The Qué. C.A. dismissed the appeal. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”
 

Patents: Infringement; Abuse of Process

Apotex Inc. v. Janssen Inc. and Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd.,2023 FCA 220 (41087)
There is a publication ban in this case, certain information not available to the public, in the context of alleged patent infringement and abuse of process. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”