2 total
A party may be required to provide particulars and answer discovery questions regarding its legal position.
The appellant, the Attorney General of Canada, appealed an order requiring it to respond to interrogatories and provide particulars of its legal position in a complex action brought by the respondent band.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Rules of Civil Procedure permit a party to be examined on its legal position to focus the issues and prevent surprise at trial.
The court found that the word 'matter' in the rules governing discovery is broad enough to include a party's position on a legal issue.
Agricultural Stabilization Board has authority to set quantity limits for subsidy payments to apple producers.
The appellants, large apple producers, challenged the authority of the Agricultural Stabilization Board to set minimum and maximum limits on the quantities of apples eligible for subsidy payments under the Agricultural Stabilization Act.
The Federal Court of Appeal held that the Board had the implicit authority to set such limits.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board's broad duties and powers under the Act were sufficient to enable it to set quantity limits for subsidy payments in the interest of a workable price stabilization program, especially in the absence of any preclusion in the Act or regulations.
