Granted
Elections: Returning Officer Appointments
Canada (Attorney General) v. Drover, 2025 ONCA 468 (42005)
Mr. Drover lost his position as returning officer after moving outside the electoral district to which he had been appointed. At the time of Mr. Drover’s appointment, and at the time of his termination, the Canada Elections Act required returning officers to reside within the electoral district in which their powers and duties were to be performed. Mr. Drover challenged the constitutionality of the Canada Elections Act provisions which required him to reside within his electoral district, on the basis those provisions deprive individuals of the liberty interest protected by s. 7 of the Charter. The constitutional challenge was dismissed. Mr. Drover appealed. The Ont. C.A. allowed the appeal. Section 24(4) of the Canada Elections Act was declared to be of no force or effect pursuant to s. 52(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, as contrary to s. 7 of the Charter. “The application for leave to appeal…is granted.”
Dismissed
Civil Litigation/Torts: Alleged Cyber-bullying
B.A. v. J.F, 2025 NSCA 59 (42008)
There is a publication ban in this case, in the context of alleged cyber-bullying. “The motion to adduce further evidence is dismissed. The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
Class Actions: Deceased Class Members
Whaling v. R., 2025 FCA 140 (41986)
In 2014, the Applicant and others successfully challenged legislation which had the effect of denying them the accelerated parole review scheme which was in force at the time of their sentencing and delaying their eligibility for day parole. In 2016, the Applicant brought a class action seeking damages for herself and others for the breach of their s. 11(h) Charter rights. The class action was certified along with a series of common issues. The Applicant brought a motion for determination of preliminary questions of law related to those issues. This Leave concerns the answer to the questions related to the survivability of claims for Charter damages. The Fed. Court judge determined an estate of a deceased class member in the action could claim damages for a breach of s. 11(h). The Fed. C.A. allowed the appeal by the Respondent Crown and determined the estate of a deceased class member could not claim Charter damages. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed with costs.”
Criminal Law: Joint Sentencing Submissions
Littlewolfe v. R., 2025 SKCA 92 (42133)
Mr. Littlewolfe was charged with second degree murder. Crown counsel advised the Crown would seek a dangerous offender designation and an indeterminate sentence. Mr. Littlewolfe pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Defence counsel and Crown counsel made a joint sentencing submission on agreed facts. They jointly recommended life imprisonment with parole eligibility at 7 years. Pelletier J. sentenced Mr. Littlewolfe to life imprisonment with parole eligibility at 7 years. A majority of the Sask. C.A. dismissed an appeal from the sentence, the dissenting judge would have imposed a sentence of 15 years imprisonment. “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.”
Criminal Law: Sexual Offences
C.-E. v. R., 2025 BCCA 311 (42108)
There is a publication ban in this case, in the context of sexual offences on a military base. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”
Criminal Law: Withdrawal of Charges
Lafond v. R., 2025 QCCA 1215 (42125)
Mr. Lafond faced a criminal charge, it being alleged he failed to comply with a court order, pursuant to s. 733.1(1)(b). At the request of the prosecution, the Court of Québec ordered the withdrawal of that charge. However, Mr. Lafond wanted his criminal trial to continue to end as a final verdict, contesting that decision by the Court of Québec, by way of an appeal. A Québec Superior Court judge granted the prosecution’s motion for summary dismissal of Mr. Lafond’s appeal and dismissed his appeal. Mr. Lafond then tried to appeal the Qué. Superior Court’s decision; Qué. C.A. declared his appeal as being “abandoned”, pursuant to s. 80 of the Rules of the Qué. C.A. in Criminal Matters. “The application for leave to appeal…is dismissed.”