Canada: Court Of Appeal Summaries (September 28 – October 2, 2015)

Last Updated: October 13 2015
Article by John Polyzogopoulos

Hello Everyone,

There was only one substantive civil decision of the Court of Appeal this week. It involved an appeal of a motion judge's order that a garnished bank account of the State of Libya enjoyed diplomatic immunity and was therefore not subject to garnishment. However, the court only dealt with the preliminary question of whether hearing the appeal was premature, having regard to Libya's pending rule 38.11 motion in Superior Court to set the underlying order aside. The appeal was adjourned sine die and the stay of enforcement was continued pending the outcome of the motion.

We hope you find this service useful and continue to share it with friends and colleagues. Your comments and feedback are always welcome.

Enjoy your weekend.

John Polyzogopoulos

Blaney McMurtry LLP

JPolyzogopoulos@blaney.com

http://www.blaney.com/lawyers/john-polyzogopoulos

Table of Contents

Civil Cases

Canadian Planning and Design Consultants Inc. v. Libya, 2015 ONCA 661 (click on the case name to read the summary)

Keywords: International Law, Commercial Law, International Arbitration, Waiver of Diplomatic Immunity, Registration and Enforcement of Arbitral Award, Notices of Garnishment, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 38.11, Motion to Set Aside Order Made Without Notice, , Stay Order, Adjournment of Appeal, Premature Appeal, Mootness, Multiplicity of Proceedings, Inconsistent Findings, Irreparable Harm, RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada, State Immunity Act, s. 11, Vienna Convention, Article 25

For a list of Criminal Law decisions, click here

For a list of Ontario Review Board Decision decisions, click here

Civil Cases

Canadian Planning and Design Consultants Inc. v. Libya, 2015 ONCA 661

[Cronk, Hourigan and Benotto JJ.A.]

Counsel:

J. Adair and D. Quayat, for the appellant

J. Melia, J. Radford and K. Humphries, for the respondent, the State of Libya

C. Francis, for the respondent, Royal Bank of Canada

J. Dais-Visca and J. Winbaum, for the intervener, the Attorney General of Canada

Keywords: International Law, Commercial Law, International Arbitration, Waiver of Diplomatic Immunity, Registration and Enforcement of Arbitral Award, Notices of Garnishment, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 38.11, Motion to Set Aside Order Made Without Notice, , Stay Order, Adjournment of Appeal, Premature Appeal, Mootness, Multiplicity of Proceedings, Inconsistent Findings, Irreparable Harm, RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada, State Immunity Act, s. 11, Vienna Convention, Article 25

Facts:

Litigation began as a claim by Canadian Planning and Design Consultants Inc. ("Canadian Planning") against the respondent sovereign state, Libya, arising out of a hospital management agreement made in Libya in 2007. The dispute was heard before the International Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration ("ICC"), which ordered Libya to pay an award of approximately $11 million dollars.

Canadian Planning brought an application for registration and enforcement of the ICC award in Ontario. The court issued the requested order ("REO"), which included language stating that Libya had waived its immunity from the attachment. In December 2014, the Superior Court issued notices of garnishment naming Libya as the debtor. Canadian Planning served the notices of garnishment on the respondent, RBC. Shortly after, Libya moved to set aside the REO pursuant to rule 38.11. This motion is yet to be heard.

This appeal arises out of a motion judge's order to quash the notices of garnishment, order that no new notices be issued and restraining the appellant, Canadian Planning, from any further enforcement against the bank accounts listed in the notices of garnishment. This order was made on the basis that the bank accounts enjoy diplomatic immunity. A stay of this order ("Stay Order") was granted by MacFarland J.A. pending determination of this appeal.

At the outset of the hearing, the court requested that the parties address whether the hearing of the appeal on the merits was premature due to Libya's pending rule 38.11 motion in Superior Court.

Issues:

(1)Whether the hearing of the appeal on the merits is premature having regard to Libya's rule 38.11 motion in the Superior Court?

(2) Should the Stay Order continue as a term of the adjournment of this appeal?

Holding:

The appeal is adjourned sine die and the Stay Order is continued.

Reasoning:

(1)Yes. The court was concerned that the issues for adjudication in the Superior Court could be relevant to those raised on this appeal or render this appeal moot depending on the outcome of the rule 38.11 motion.

RBC's position was that if Libya succeeds on its rule 38.11 motion, an application would be required to address whether state immunity applies and only after this was decided, would the question of diplomatic immunity arise. The court disagreed with RBC's argument that these are stand-alone issues and that the appeal should proceed.

The court concluded that it was not an efficient or appropriate use of judicial resources to have two courts determining the same issues in what is essentially the same litigation. This risks inconsistent rulings being made. There is also the possibility that additional evidence may be introduced on the rule 38.11 motion that may have bearing on this appeal.

Relying on British case law with similar facts, Libya also argued that the appeal should proceed regardless of prematurity or potential mootness concerns. The court disagreed for two reasons. First, the decision to adjourn proceedings on the grounds of prematurity is highly discretionary. Second, they distinguished the British case on the basis that at the time of that hearing, the issues on appeal had been rendered moot and the House of Lords chose to address the appeal on its merits because the issues raised were of "outstanding international importance".

(2) Yes. The court found that the Stay Order should be continued. Libya, RBC and the Attorney General of Canada all opposed the Stay Order for the following reasons which the court rejected.

Libya argued that the effect of the Stay Order was that it essentially froze Libya's use of its RBC bank accounts, impairing its ability to operate its embassy in Canada. The court found there was no evidence before it that showed Libya's ability to operate its embassy had been adversely affected by the Stay Order. Libya also argued that the Stay Order violates s. 11 of the State Immunity Act. The court held that until the waiver of immunity issues had been determined, the prohibition under s.11 could not operate.

The Attorney General, in its role as intervener, also opposed the Stay Order. The government argued it breached Canada's obligation under Article 25 of the Vienna Convention. The court found there was no evidence that proved that the continuance of the Stay Order would violate Canada's obligation under that Article.

The court concluded that if the Stay Order was lifted, there was a strong possibility that Canadian Planning would suffer irreparable harm because of the risk that funds could be removed from the accounts. Adopting the reasons of MacFarland J.A. in the stay motion and citing the factors enumerated in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada, the court ordered the continuation of the Stay Order.

Criminal Decisions

Haghparast-Rad v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 ONCA 653

[Feldman, Rouleau and Watt JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Sam Haghparast-Rad, acting in person

David Aaron, for the Attorney General of Canada

Keywords: Criminal Law, Drug Smuggling, Credit for Time Served, Custodial Sentence, Habeas Corpus, Days Served in Lieu of Payment, International Transfer of Offenders Act, Khadr v. Edmonton Institution, Appeal Dismissed

R. v. Owens, 2015 ONCA 652

[Laskin, Hourigan and Pardu JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Mabel Lai, for the appellant

James Zegers, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Impaired Driving, Breath Sample Evidence, Admissibility, Right to Counsel, Waiver, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s.10(b), s.24(2), R. v. Grant, R. v. R. (R.), R. v. Sinclair, Appeal Dismissed

R. v. Smethurst (Appeal Book Endorsement), 2015 ONCA 649

[Doherty, Tulloch and Huscroft JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Ken J. Berger, for the appellant

Matthew Asma, for the respondent

Gavin S. MacKenzie, for the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

Keywords: Criminal Law, Jurisdiction, Disease of the Mind, Public Safety, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Criminal Code, s.672.54, s.672.45(1.1), s.672.46, R. v. Winko

R. v. Jones-Solomon, 2015 ONCA 654

[Watt, Brown and Roberts JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Kristin Bailey, for the appellant

Greg Skerkowski, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, First-Degree Murder, Manslaughter, Credit for Time Served, Preliminary Inquiry, Demonstrably Unfit Sentence, Misapprehension of Evidence, Vetrovec Warning, Criminal Code, s.715(1), R. v. Saleh, R. v. Potvin, R. v. H. (W.), Leave to Appeal Sentence Granted, Appeal from Conviction Dismissed

R. v. Arnaout, 2015 ONCA 655

[LaForme, Watt and Epstein JJ.A.]

Counsel:

David E. Harris, for the appellant

John Neander, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Attempted Murder, Criminal Intent, Presumption of Integrity, Dangerous Offender, R. v. Teskey, R. v. Thompson, Appeal Allowed in Part

R. v. Gandhi, 2015 ONCA 660

[Doherty, Benotto, Miller JJ.A]

Counsel:

Paul Bursteuin, for the appellant

Mabel Lai, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Sexual Assault, Forcible Confinement, Credibility Analysis, Leave to Appeal Sentence Granted, Sentence Appeal Dismissed, Appeal from Conviction Dismissed

R. v. Wolynec, 2015 ONCA 656

[Gillese, Watt and Brown JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Erika Chozik, for the appellant

John Patton, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Robbery, Evidence, Reasonableness, Criminal Code, s.686(1)(a)(i), R. v. R.E.M, R. v. Sinclair, Leave to Appeal Granted, Appeal from Conviction Dismissed, Appeal against Sentence Dismissed

R. v. Wong, 2015 ONCA 657

[Strathy C.J.O., Doherty and Gillese JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Mark C. Halfyard and Breana Vandebeek, for the appellant

Jason Wakely, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Constitutional Law, Search and Seizure, Exclusion of Evidence, Detainment Prior to Arrest, Right to Counsel, Charter Breach, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s.24(2), s.8, s.9, s.10(b), R. v. Grant, R. v. Oickle, Appeal Allowed

United States v. Angelov, 2015 ONCA 659

[Laskin, Feldman and Simmons JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Heather Graham, for the appellant

E. Chozik, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Extradition, Fraud, Test for Committal, Criminal Code, s.342, Extradition Act, s.29(1)(a), United States of America v. Ferras, Danielson v. United States of America, Appeal Allowed

Must v. Shkuryna, 2015 ONCA 665

[Feldman, Juriansz and Brown JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Robert Must, acting in person

Emily Griffith, for the respondent the Public Guardian and Trustee

Annie Kenet, for the respondent Yana Shkuryna

Keywords: Interlocutory Order, Public Guardian and Trustee, Special Party, Appeal Dismissed

Sistem Mühendislik İnşaat Sanayi Ve Ticaret Anomic Sirketi v. Kyrgyz Republic, 2015 ONCA 666

[Hoy A.C.J.O., Feldman and Lauwers JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Brian Casey and Matt Saunders, for the appellant

George J. Pollack and Steven G. Frankel, for the respondent

Keywords: Disposition of Costs, Bad Faith

R. v. Rotman, 2015 ONCA 663

[Cronk, Epstein and Brown JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Catriona Verner, for the appellant

Allison Dellandrea, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Possession of Child Pornography, Failure To Comply With A Prohibition Order, Failure To Comply With A Probation Order, Credit for Pre-Sentence Custody, Sentence Demonstrably Unfit, Long-Term Offender Supervision Order, Criminal Code, s.163.1(4)(a), s. 719(3.2), s. 753.1(3)(b), R. v. M.(C.A.), R. v. Summers, Leave To File Fresh Evidence Granted, Appeal From Sentence Granted, Appeal From Custodial Sentence Granted, Appeal Dismissed

R. v. Wu, 2015 ONCA 667

[LaForme, Watt and Epstein JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Howard Piafsky, for the appellant

Jill R. Presser and Leora R. Shemesh, for the respondent

Keywords: Criminal Law, Constitutional Law, Possession of Controlled Substances, Surveillance, Search Warrant, Search Incident to Arrest, Exclusion of Evidence, Standard of Review, Constitutional Breach, Garofoli Review, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s.24(2), s.8, s.9, R. v. Shepherd, R. v. MacKenzie, Appeal Allowed

United States v. Cavan, 2015 ONCA 664

[Watt, Pepall and Huscroft JJ.A.]

Counsel:

John Norris and Meara Conway, for the applicant

Nancy Dennison, for the respondents

Keywords: Criminal Law, Extradition, Conspiracy to Traffic, Parole, Committal Hearing, Standard of Review, Assessment of Prejudice, International Transfer of Offenders Act, Extradition Act, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s.7, s.11(b), Fischbacher v. Canada (Minister of Justice), United States of America v. Johnson, Hanson v. Canada (Minister of Justice), Appeal Dismissed

Ontario Review Board

Marzec (Re), 2015 ONCA 658

[Feldman, MacPherson and Miller JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Janice Blackburn, for the respondent, the Person in Charge of Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre

Kevin Rawluk, for the respondent, the Attorney General of Ontario

Keywords: Criminal Law, Assault with a Weapon, Conditional Discharge, NCRMD, Criminal Code, s.267, s.672.78(1), Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), Appeal Allowed

Gonzalez (Re), 2015 ONCA 650

[Doherty, Tulloch and Huscroft JJ.A.]

Counsel:

Andrew Menchynski and Cate Martell, for the appellant

Kimberley Crosbie, for the Crown respondent

Keywords: Mental Health Law, Public Safety, Treatment Impasse, Mazzei v. British Columbia (Director of Adult Forensic Psychiatric Services), Appeal Dismissed

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
John Polyzogopoulos
Events from this Firm
8 Nov 2018, Conference, Toronto, Canada

This year’s program is entitled “An Analysis of Fidelity Claims for the Modern World.” The program will address important substantive and practical issues germane to today’s fidelity claims handling.

 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions