Nancy Noble

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) sought access to and copies of exhibits from a preliminary inquiry involving four correctional officers charged in the death of Ashley Smith.

The charges were dropped, and the exhibits were transferred for a coroner's inquest.

The application judge granted CBC access but restricted copying to portions of the video played in open court and prohibited copying the footage of Smith's death.

The Court of Appeal allowed CBC's appeal, holding that the Dagenais/Mentuck test applies to media requests for exhibits and that the open court principle includes the right to copy exhibits in full, absent convincing evidence of a serious risk to the administration of justice or other protected interests.

The appellants, minimum-security prisoners serving life sentences, appealed the dismissal of their application for habeas corpus.

They challenged their impending transfer from a small minimum-security facility to a larger multi-level institution, arguing the transfer would deprive them of their residual liberty interest due to increased perimeter security and movement restrictions.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the differences between the facilities were minimal and did not constitute a substantial change in the conditions of incarceration or a deprivation of any residual liberty interest.

The applicants brought a motion to set aside an order denying a stay of a lower court decision that permitted the closure of a minimum-security federal institution and the transfer of its residents.

The Court of Appeal applied the R.J.R.-MacDonald test and found that the Charter issues raised constituted a serious issue to be tried.

The court also found that the applicants might suffer irreparable harm if moved, and that the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay, particularly given the respondent's undertaking not to close or sell the facility pending the appeal.

The motion was granted and a stay was ordered.

The appellants, serving life sentences for murder, applied for habeas corpus to challenge a new policy by the Commissioner of Corrections that automatically classified them as maximum security.

The motion judge declined to exercise jurisdiction, holding that the Federal Court was the appropriate forum.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that while provincial superior courts have jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus applications regarding prison conditions, they should generally decline to exercise it when the application essentially challenges a federal statutory power that is subject to judicial review in the Federal Court, absent exceptional circumstances.