3 total
Court clarified that a Certificate of Pending Litigation applies only to specific lots to protect financing.
The plaintiff sought clarification of a previous order granting leave to register a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) on 'Phase 2 Lots'.
The court clarified that the CPL should apply only to lots 112 to 150, as registering it on additional lots could jeopardize the defendants' financing arrangements.
Any further amounts owing to the plaintiff could be addressed through damages or a future application for additional security.
Criminal Code provisions permitting provincially licensed lotteries are a valid exercise of federal criminal law power.
The appellants were charged with counselling bingo licensees to violate the terms and conditions of their licences, contrary to the Criminal Code.
They challenged the constitutionality of the Code provisions, arguing they constituted an improper delegation of criminal law power to the provinces and created an invalid discretionary regulatory regime.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the provisions were not an improper delegation of legislative power, but rather a valid exercise of the criminal law power that incorporated provincial legislation by reference or limited the reach of the criminal law.
The Court also found that the non-publication of the licence terms and conditions did not violate the Charter.
Appeal dismissed; interveners may participate fully in proceedings before the Competition Tribunal.
The appellants appealed a decision of the Federal Court of Appeal regarding the role of interveners before the Competition Tribunal.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, with Lamer J. dissenting.
The majority adopted the reasons of the Federal Court of Appeal, holding that interveners may participate fully in the proceedings.
