B. Patrick Metcalfe

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 appellant was injured during a snowmobile race when he collided with a signal official who had moved onto the track.

He sued the race association and the official for negligence.

The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the lower courts' dismissal of the action, finding that a waiver clause in the race entry form validly exonerated the respondents from liability.

The Court held that the clause was not unconscionable or contrary to public policy, as the appellant voluntarily participated in a dangerous sport without any social or economic pressure.