R. v. Nipawin and District Satellite T.V. Inc., 1991 CanLII 110 (SCC), [1991] 1 SCR 64

Nipawin and District Satellite T.V. Inc. and Sylvester N. Zanyk Appellants

v.

Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

indexed as: r. v. nipawin and district satellite t.v. inc.

File No.: 20948.

1991: January 22.

Present: La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Stevenson JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for saskatchewan

Communication law ‑‑ Broadcasting ‑‑ Meaning of phrase "broadcasting undertaking" in the Radio and Broadcasting Acts ‑‑ Radio Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. R‑1, ss. 2, 11 ‑‑ Broadcasting Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. B‑11, ss. 2, 29.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (1988), 1988 CanLII 5190 (SK CA), 65 Sask. R. 151, [1988] 4 W.W.W. 375, 42 C.C.C. (3d) 32, allowing the Crown's appeal from a judgment of Armstrong J. (1987), 1987 CanLII 4524 (SK QB), 63 Sask. R. 290, [1988] 1 W.W.R. 90, affirming the appellants' acquittal on charges contrary to s. 11(1) of the Radio Act and s. 29(3) of the Broadcasting Act. Appeal dismissed.

James Taylor, Q.C., for the appellants.

Horst H. Dahlem, Q.C., Avrum Cohen and William Howard, for the respondent.

//La Forest J.//

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

La Forest J. ‑‑ We are all of the view that the appeal should be dismissed for the reasons given by Vancise J.A. in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. There shall be no order as to costs.

Judgment accordingly.

Solicitors for the appellants: Taylor & Fitzpatrick, Nipawin.

Solicitor for the respondent: J. C. Tait, Ottawa.