John A. Myers

The appellants, farmers in financial difficulty, obtained a stay of proceedings under the federal Farm Debt Review Act.

While the stay was in effect, the respondent creditor obtained an order granting leave to commence foreclosure proceedings under the provincial Family Farm Protection Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the leave application under the provincial Act was a proceeding prohibited by the federal stay.

The operational incompatibility between the two statutes triggered the doctrine of federal paramountcy, rendering the provincial leave order invalid and a nullity.

The applicants sought an order staying the disposition of a Manitoba farm by the respondent, a Crown agent, pending the disposition of their appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The respondent argued that provincial legislation barred injunctive relief against the Crown.

The Court held that provincial legislation cannot control the relief granted by the Supreme Court under its own Act.

Applying section 65.1 of the Supreme Court Act, the Court granted the requested interim relief to prevent the respondent from selling the property, which would have negated the effect of a potential successful appeal.

The respondent, a recipient of social assistance in Manitoba, challenged the province's practice of making deductions from his monthly allowance to recover past overpayments, arguing it violated the federal Canada Assistance Plan (CAP).

He also challenged Manitoba's practice of allowing municipalities to set their own social assistance rates.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that CAP requires provinces to provide assistance in an amount compatible with an individual's basic requirements, but does not prohibit the recovery of overpayments, provided such deductions do not cause undue hardship.

The Court also held that CAP permits municipalities to set assistance rates, provided the province establishes the criteria for determining persons in need.

The appeal by the federal government was allowed.