1997 reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada

Last updated

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 1997. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions. [1]

Contents

Reasons

  Delivered the Court's reason
  Joined the Court's reason
  Filed a concurrence
  Joined a concurrence
  Filed a dissent
  Joined a dissent
  Filed a concurrence/dissent
  Joined a concurrence/dissent
  Did not participate in the judgment
  Did not participate in the final disposition of the judgment
  Not a member of the Court at the time of hearing or delivering
  • Decisions that do not note a Justice delivering the Court's reason are per coram.
  • Multiple concurrences and dissents within a case are numbered, with joining votes numbered accordingly. Justices occasionally join multiple reasons in a single case; each vote is subdivided accordingly.
  • Multiple unnumbered reasons are jointly written or delivered.
  • Decisions that are given orally from the bench are denoted by a "V"; per coram decisions delivered orally from the bench only note a "V" on the most senior justice on the panel.
  • An asterisk ( * ) in the Court's opinion denotes that it was only a majority in part or a plurality.
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
R v Hinse , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 3 January 21, 1997January 21, 1997
V
Burlington Northern Railroad Co v Canadian National Railway Co , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 5 January 21, 1997January 21, 1997
V
R v Osvath , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 7 January 23, 1997January 23, 1997
V
R v C(DA) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 8 January 24, 1997January 24, 1997
V
Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority v Dell Holdings Ltd , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 32 October 9, 1996January 30, 1997
R v Finn , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 10 January 30, 1997January 30, 1997
V
R v Delaronde , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 213 January 30, 1997January 30, 1997
V
Hill v Nova Scotia (AG) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 69 November 27, 1996January 30, 1997
Comeau's Sea Foods Ltd v Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 12 October 2, 1996January 30, 1997
R v Leipert , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 281 November 28, 1996February 6, 1997
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
R v Latimer , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 217 November 27, 1996February 6, 1997
R v Carosella , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 80 June 19, 1996February 6, 1997
Eaton v Brant County Board of Education , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 241 October 8, 1996February 6, 1997
R v Jensen , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 304 February 11, 1997February 11, 1997
V
R v MacDonnell , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 305 February 13, 1997February 13, 1997
V
R v Wickstead , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 307 February 14, 1997February 14, 1997
V
Goodswimmer v Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 309 February 18, 1997February 18, 1997
V
R v Thompson , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 311 February 19, 1997February 19, 1997
V
R v Naud , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 312 February 20, 1997February 20, 1997
R v Jacquard , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 314 October 10, 1996February 20, 1997
1
2
1
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
R v Russell , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 356 February 21, 1997February 21, 1997
V
Toronto (City of) Board of Education v Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation, District 15 , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 487 November 6, 1996February 27, 1997
Royal Bank of Canada v Sparrow Electric Corp , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 411 June 19, 1996February 27, 1997
Benner v Canada (Secretary of State) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 358 October 1, 1996February 27, 1997
R v Halnuck , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 533 March 19, 1997March 19, 1997
V
R v Stillman , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 607 January 26, 1996
November 7, 1996		March 20, 1997
1
2
3
R v Melnichuk , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 602 March 17, 1997March 20, 1997
R v Haroun , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 593 January 24, 1997March 20, 1997
R v Curragh Inc , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 537 November 26, 1996March 20, 1997
R v Buric , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 535 March 20, 1997March 20, 1997
V
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) v Southam Inc , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 748 November 25, 1996March 20, 1997
Farber v Royal Trust Co , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 846 November 28, 1996March 27, 1997
Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 301 v Montreal (City of) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 793 November 5, 1996March 27, 1997
Germain v Montreal (City of) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1144 April 23, 1997April 23, 1997
V
R v Noble , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 874 October 29, 1996April 24, 1997
1
2
2
3
R v McDonnell , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 948 December 6, 1996April 24, 1997
R v Cook , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1113 February 20, 1997April 24, 1997
Pointe-Claire (City of) v Quebec (Labour Court) , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1015 November 6, 1996April 24, 1997
Hamstra (Guardian ad litem of) v British Columbia Rugby Union , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1092 January 23, 1997April 24, 1997
R v Coreas , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1147 April 25, 1997April 25, 1997
V
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
Brkich & Brkich Enterprises Ltd v American Home Assurance Co , [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1149 April 28, 1997April 28, 1997
V
R v Doliente , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 11 May 20, 1997May 20, 1997
V
Soulos v Korkontzilas , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 217 February 18, 1997May 22, 1997
R v Feeney , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 13 June 11, 1996May 22, 1997
2
1
1
1
R v Currie , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 260 January 31, 1997May 22, 1997
Opetchesaht Indian Band v Canada , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 119 October 28, 1996May 22, 1997
Hercules Managements Ltd v Ernst & Young , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 165 December 6, 1996May 22, 1997
R v Senior , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 288 May 23, 1997May 23, 1997
V
Martin v Artyork Investments Ltd , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 290 May 26, 1997May 26, 1997
V
R v Bedford , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 292 May 27, 1997May 27, 1997
V
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
United States of America v Desfossés , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 326 April 21, 1997May 29, 1997
Sylvester v British Columbia , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 315 February 13, 1997May 29, 1997
Construction Gilles Paquette ltée v Entreprises Végo ltée , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 299 February 12, 1997May 29, 1997
Canada Post Corp v Canadian Union of Postal Workers , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 294 February 12, 1997May 29, 1997
R v Jack , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 334 June 20, 1997June 20, 1997
V
R v Allender , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 333 June 20, 1997June 20, 1997
V
/R
United States of America v Dynar , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 462 [ permanent dead link ]January 28, 1997June 26, 1997
St Mary's Indian Band v Cranbrook (City of) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 657 June 26, 1997June 26, 1997
R v Mara , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 630 March 12, 1997June 26, 1997
R v La , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 680 March 13, 1997June 26, 1997
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
Hickman Motors Ltd v Canada , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 336 October 30, 1996June 26, 1997
Dagg v Canada (Minister of Finance) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 403 January 22, 1997June 26, 1997
Arndt v Smith , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 539 January 29, 1997June 26, 1997
Armada Lines Ltd v Chaleur Fertilizers Ltd , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 617 March 11, 1997June 26, 1997
Air Canada v Ontario (Liquor Control Board) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 581 February 17, 1997June 26, 1997
Côté v Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 714 June 27, 1997June 27, 1997
V
R v Greyeyes , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 825 April 29, 1997July 10, 1997
R v G(SG) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 716 March 17, 1997July 10, 1997
R v Esau , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 777 March 18, 1997July 10, 1997
1
2
R v Cogger , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 845 May 26, 1997July 10, 1997
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
Doré v Verdun (City of) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 862 January 27, 1997July 10, 1997
Pasiechnyk v Saskatchewan (Workers' Compensation Board) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 890 April 30, 1997August 28, 1997
Reference Re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island; Reference Re Independence and Impartiality of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3 [2] December 3, 4, 1996September 18, 1997
R v Lifchus , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 320 May 29, 1997September 18, 1997
R v Hydro-Québec , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 213 February 10, 1997September 18, 1997
St Mary's Indian Band v Cranbrook (City of) , [1997] 2 S.C.R. 678 February 19, 1997September 23, 1997
R v Belnavis , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 341 May 27, 1997September 25, 1997
Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Tobiass , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 391 June 26, 1997September 25, 1997
R v S(RD) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 March 10, 1997September 26, 1997
2
1
2
Peixeiro v Haberman , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 549 March 13, 1997September 26, 1997
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
Canada (AG) v Canada (Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 440 June 25, 1997September 26, 1997
Libman v Quebec (AG) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 569 April 22, 1997October 9, 1997
Eldridge v British Columbia (AG) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624 April 24, 1997October 9, 1997
R v Solomon , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 696 October 10, 1997October 10, 1997
V
R v Lawes , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 694 October 10, 1997October 10, 1997
V
R v Ly , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 698 October 17, 1997October 17, 1997
V
R v Allen , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 700 October 17, 1997October 17, 1997
V
Wallace v United Grain Growers Ltd , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701 May 22, 1997October 30, 1997
Gold v Rosenberg , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 767 May 11, 1997October 30, 1997
Citadel General Assurance Co v Lloyds Bank Canada , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 805 May 20, 1997October 30, 1997
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v G(DF) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 925 June 18, 1997October 31, 1997
Godbout v Longueuil (City of) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 844 May 28, 1997October 31, 1997
1
2
2
1
2
1
R v Skalbania , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 995 November 6, 1997November 6, 1997
V
S(L) v S(C) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1003 November 7, 1997November 7, 1997
V
R v Labrecque , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1001 November 7, 1997November 7, 1997
V
R v Bablitz , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1005 November 14, 1997November 14, 1997
V
R v Charland , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1006 December 4, 1997December 4, 1997
Mochinski v Trendline Industries Ltd , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1176 October 7, 1997December 11, 1997
Lewis (Guardian ad litem of) v British Columbia , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1145 October 7, 1997December 11, 1997
Delgamuukw v British Columbia , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010 June 16, 17, 1997December 11, 1997
1
2
Case nameArguedDecidedLamerLa ForestL'Heureux‑
Dubé		SopinkaGonthierCoryMcLachlinIacobucciMajor
R v F(CC) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1183 October 16, 1997December 18, 1997
Porto Seguro Companhia de Seguros Gerais v Belcan SA , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1278 October 14, 1997December 18, 1997
Bow Valley Husky (Bermuda) Ltd v Saint John Shipbuilding Ltd , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1210 June 19, 1997December 18, 1997

Related Research Articles

In Canadian and New Zealand law, fundamental justice is the fairness underlying the administration of justice and its operation. The principles of fundamental justice are specific legal principles that command "significant societal consensus" as "fundamental to the way in which the legal system ought fairly to operate", per R v Malmo-Levine. These principles may stipulate basic procedural rights afforded to anyone facing an adjudicative process or procedure that affects fundamental rights and freedoms, and certain substantive standards related to the rule of law that regulate the actions of the state.

Canadian constitutional law is the area of Canadian law relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Canada by the courts. All laws of Canada, both provincial and federal, must conform to the Constitution and any laws inconsistent with the Constitution have no force or effect.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2005. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2006. A total of 59 judgments were published. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2004. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2003. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

<i>Reference re Remuneration of Judges (No 2)</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Reference Re Remuneration of Judges [1998] 1 S.C.R. 3 was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada addressing questions regarding the 1997 Provincial Judges Reference, also known as Re Remuneration of Judges. Since the Supreme Court, in 1997, found independent committees were needed to help determine judicial salaries, the Court now had to address challenges regarding the creation of such committees.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2002. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2001. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2000. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 1999. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 1998. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2007. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2008. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2009. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2010. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2011. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2012. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2013. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

The table below lists the decisions delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2014. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.

References

  1. ↑ Motions released in 1997: R. v. Kudmani, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1142
  2. ↑ "Supreme Court of Canada - Decisions - Ref re Remuneration of Judges of the Prov. Court of P.E.I.; Ref re Independence and Impartiality of Judges of the Prov. Court of P.E.I." Archived from the original on 2006-09-10. Retrieved 2007-06-15.
  Delivered the Court's reason
  Joined the Court's reason
  Filed a concurrence
  Joined a concurrence
  Filed a dissent
  Joined a dissent
  Filed a concurrence/dissent
  Joined a concurrence/dissent
  Did not participate in the judgment
  Did not participate in the final disposition of the judgment
  Not a member of the Court at the time of hearing or delivering
  • Decisions that do not note a Justice delivering the Court's reason are per coram.
  • Multiple concurrences and dissents within a case are numbered, with joining votes numbered accordingly. Justices occasionally join multiple reasons in a single case; each vote is subdivided accordingly.
  • Multiple unnumbered reasons are jointly written or delivered.
  • Decisions that are given orally from the bench are denoted by a "V"; per coram decisions delivered orally from the bench only note a "V" on the most senior justice on the panel.
  • An asterisk ( * ) in the Court's opinion denotes that it was only a majority in part or a plurality.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.