Pierre Genest

Minority shareholders and debenture stockholders challenged the sale of surplus railway lands under nineteenth-century perpetual railway leases and a related agreement transferring lands to a subsidiary of the majority shareholder.

The Court held that the lessee had acquired, under the lease and statutory framework, the power to sell surplus lands, that the debenture stock constituted an incumbrance for purposes of the 1891 statute, and that reinvestment of sale proceeds in the railway satisfied the statutory scheme.

The Court further held that approved rail line abandonments did not breach the lease, the shareholder meeting approving the later transaction was validly called, and the majority shareholder lawfully held and voted shares.

The lessor was not entitled in law or equity to recover its reversionary interest in lands sold.

Appeals were dismissed and the respondent’s cross-appeals were allowed in part.

The Governor in Council referred questions to the Supreme Court regarding the validity of Manitoba's unilingual legislation under s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870.

The Court held that the requirement to enact, print, and publish laws in both English and French is mandatory, rendering all unilingual Acts of the Manitoba Legislature invalid and of no force or effect.

However, to avoid a legal vacuum and preserve the constitutional principle of the rule of law, the Court deemed the invalid current Acts temporarily valid for the minimum period necessary for their translation, re-enactment, printing, and publication.

The Governor in Council referred a constitutional question to the Supreme Court of Canada regarding whether Canada or Newfoundland has the right to explore and exploit, and the legislative jurisdiction over, the mineral and other natural resources of the continental shelf offshore Newfoundland.

The Court held that the continental shelf rights are an extraterritorial manifestation of external sovereignty.

Since Newfoundland did not possess external sovereignty prior to joining Confederation, and international law did not recognize continental shelf rights at that time, the rights accrued to Canada.

Consequently, Canada has both the right to explore and exploit the resources and the legislative jurisdiction over them under its residual peace, order, and good government power.

The appellant appealed from a judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal dismissing an application for judicial review of a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Commission.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding no error of law in the Federal Court of Appeal's decision.