2 total
A person cited for contempt of court for failing to comply with an injunction cannot be compelled to testify.
The appellants obtained a permanent injunction ordering the respondents to cease distributing decoders that descrambled pay television signals.
The appellants subsequently filed an application alleging the respondents committed contempt of court by failing to comply with the injunction.
At the hearing, the appellants called one of the respondents to testify, but he objected on the ground that he was not compellable in a proceeding where he was cited for contempt.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that a person cited for contempt under the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be compelled to testify, as contempt of court is quasi-penal in nature and compelling testimony would violate the fundamental principle against self-incrimination.
CRTC has statutory authority to retrospectively review interim rates and order a one-time credit for excess revenues.
The CRTC granted Bell Canada an interim rate increase in 1984, subject to review.
In 1986, after a final hearing, the CRTC determined that the interim rates had yielded excess revenues of $206 million and ordered Bell Canada to distribute this amount to customers via a one-time credit.
The Federal Court of Appeal quashed the order.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the CRTC's appeal, holding that the power to make interim orders under the Railway Act and National Transportation Act necessarily implies the power to review those rates retrospectively and to make remedial orders, such as a one-time credit, if the interim rates are found to be unjust or unreasonable.
