Dupont v. Watier, 1989 CanLII 60 (SCC), [1989] 1 SCR 1588
Régent Watier Appellant
v.
Jean‑Pierre Dupont Respondent
and
The Attorney General of Quebec Mis en cause and Intervener
The Attorney General of Canada, the Attorney General for Ontario and the Attorney General for Alberta Interveners
Indexed as: Dupont v. Watier
File No.: 20538.
1989: June 19.
Present: Dickson C.J. and Lamer, La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier and Cory JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec
Courts ‑‑ Charter of Rights ‑‑ Legal rights ‑‑ Independent court.
Constitutional law ‑‑ Charter of Rights ‑‑ Legal rights ‑‑ Independent court ‑‑ Whether the issuance of a summon by a justice of the peace whose appointment may be revoked at any time by the provincial Minister of Justice violates the right of the accused person under s. 7 of the Charter ‑‑ Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 7, 24(1) ‑‑ Constitution Act, 1982, s. 52 ‑‑ Courts of Justice Act, R.S.Q., c. T‑16, s. 178 ‑‑ Summary Convictions Act, R.S.Q., c. P‑15.
APPEAL from a judgment of Beauregard J.A., rendered on May 22, 1987, on appeal from a judgment rendered by the Superior Court on a stated case1. Appeal dismissed.
Harvey W. Yarosky and Pierre de Grandpré, Q.C., for the appellant.
Jacques Breton and Jean Lorrain, for the respondent.
Paul Monty and Marise Visocchi, for the mis en cause and intervener the Attorney General of Quebec.
Bernard Laprade and Myriam Bordeleau, for the intervener the Attorney General of Canada.
W. J. Blacklock, for the intervener the Attorney General for Ontario.
R. H. Davie, Q.C., and Stanley Rutwind, for the intervener the Attorney General for Alberta.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
The Chief Justice ‑‑ It will not be necessary to hear you, Mr. Breton, as we are all of the opinion that this appeal must be dismissed. Justice Lamer will deliver the judgment of the Court.
Lamer J. ‑‑ Assuming, without deciding, that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applied to this case throughout, we are nevertheless all of the view that this appeal must fail. None of the sections of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.Q., c. T‑16, applicable to justices of the peace, including s. 178, have been the object in this case of a challenge under s. 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
The appellant's sole attack is therefore under s. 24(1) of the Charter. There is, in this case, no evidence that Justice of the Peace Lise Collin in the exercise of her duties under the Summary Convictions Act, R.S.Q., c. P‑15, violated any of the appellant's rights under s. 7 of the Charter.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Yarosky, Fish, Isaacs & Daviault, Montréal; de Grandpré, Godin, Paquette, Lasnier & Alary, Montréal.
Solicitors for the respondent: Dupont, Breton, Proulx & Associates, Montréal.
Solicitors for the mis en cause and intervener the Attorney General of Quebec: Paul Monty and Marise Visocchi, Ste‑Foy.
Solicitor for the intervener the Attorney General of Canada: John C. Tait, Ottawa.
Solicitors for the intervener the Attorney General for Ontario: W. J. Blacklock and Renée Pomerance, Toronto.
Solicitors for the intervener the Attorney General for Alberta: R. H. Davie and Stanley Rutwind, Edmonton.