New Brunswick Provincial Court Judges' Association et al. v. New Brunswick (Minister of Justice), (2005) 391 A.R. 284 (SCC)

• Judge: McLachlin, C.J.C., Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: October 27, 2005
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2005), 391 A.R. 284 (SCC);2005 SCC 59;[2006] 5 WWR 577;299 NBR (2d) 202;391 AR 284;55 Alta LR (4th) 205;265 DLR (4th) 385;37 Admin LR (4th) 276;[2005] 3 SCR 41;348 NR 260;211 OAC 396

Provincial Court Judges v. N.B. (2005), 391 A.R. 284 (SCC);

      377 W.A.C. 284

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2006] A.R. TBEd. MY.133

Attorney General of Quebec and Minister of Justice of Quebec (appellants) v. Conférence des juges du Québec, Maurice Abud, Claude C. Boulanger, Marc Vanasse, Gilles Gagnon, Jacques R. Roy, Gérald LaForest, Jean-François Gosselin, Hubert Couture, Michael Sheehan, Yvan Mayrand, Dominique Slater, Guy Gagnon, Mireille Allaire, Anne Laberge, Armando Aznar, Jean-Pierre Lortie, Guy Lecompte, Huguette St-Louis, Rémi Bouchard, Michel Jasmin, Jacques Lachapelle, Louise Provost, Michèle Rivet, Paule Lafontaine, Rosaire Larouche, Réal R. Lapointe, Claude Chicoine, Céline Pelletier, René de La Sablonnière, Gabriel de Pokomandy, Jean R. Beaulieu, Michel Beauchemin, Jacques Trudel, Denis Bouchard, Ruth Veillet, Gilson Lachance, Claude Parent, Michel L. Auger, Lise Gaboury and Jean Alarie (respondents) and Attorney General of New Brunswick and Federation of Law Societies of Canada (intervenors)

Attorney General of Quebec and Minister of Justice of Quebec (appellants) v. Morton S. Minc, Denis Boisvert, Antonio Discepola, Yves Fournier, Gilles Gaumond, Louise Baribeau, Jean-Pierre Bessette, Pierre D. Denault, René Déry, Gérard Duguay, Pierre Fontaine, Pierre Gaston, Denis Laliberté, Louis-Jacques Léger, Jean Massé, Evasio Massignani, Ronald Schachter, Bernard Caron, Jean Charbonneau and Raymonde Verreault (respondents) and Attorney General of New Brunswick and Federation of Law Societies of Canada (intervenors)

Conférence des juges municipaux du Québec (appellant) v. Conférence des juges du Québec and Attorney General of Quebec (respondents) and Attorney General of New Brunswick and Federation of Law Societies of Canada (intervenors)

(30477; 2005 SCC 59; 2005 CSC 59)

Indexed As: New Brunswick Provincial Court Judges' Association et al. v. New Brunswick (Minister of Justice)

Supreme Court of Canada

McLachlin, C.J.C., Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron, JJ.

October 27, 2005.

Summary:

The applicants brought motions seeking an order to amend a judgment of the court rendered three months earlier (2005 SCC 44; 336 N.R. 201), or for an order for a re-hearing of the appeal in order to clarify and explain the disposition of the court's judgment.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the motions.

Practice - Topic 6103

Judgments and orders - Amendment, rescission and variation of judgments and orders - Slip rule, correction of errors or omissions - [See Practice - Topic 9136 ].

Practice - Topic 6106

Judgments and orders - Amendment, rescission and variation of judgments and orders - After judgment or order perfected or entered - [See Practice - Topic 9136 ].

Practice - Topic 9101

Appeals - Supreme Court of Canada - Rehearing - [See Practice - Topic 9136 ].

Practice - Topic 9136

Appeals - Hearing of appeal - Rehearing or reconsideration - When available - The applicants brought motions seeking an order to amend a judgment of the court rendered three months earlier or for an order for a re-hearing of the appeal in order to clarify and explain the disposition of the court's judgment - The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the motions - The motions did not meet the criteria for applying rule 81(1)(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada which was limited to errors arising from an accidental slip or omission - Nor did they meet the criteria for rule 76, which was limited to exceptional cases involving a failure of justice or an error regarding the nature of the issues - The court's judgment provided a clear expression of its opinion.

Cases Noticed:

N.H. et al. v. H.M. et al., [1999] 1 S.C.R. 761; 238 N.R. 80; 121 B.C.A.C. 146; 198 W.A.C. 146, refd to. [para. 2].

D.H. v. H.M. - see N.H. et al. v. H.M. et al.

Protestant School Board of Greater Montreal et al. v. Québec (Procureur général) et al., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 167; 97 N.R. 143; 25 Q.A.C. 118, refd to. [para. 2].

Statutes Noticed:

Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada, SOR/2002-156, rule 76, rule 81(1)(a) [para. 2].

Supreme Court of Canada Rules - see Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Counsel:

Raynold Langlois, Q.C., and Chantal Chatelain (written submissions), for the applicants, Conférence des juges du Québec et al.;

André Gauthier (written submissions), for the applicant, Conférence des juges municipaux du Québec;

Claude-Armand Sheppard and Annick Bergeron (written submissions), for the respondents on the motions, the Attorney General of Quebec and the Minister of Justice of Quebec.

Solicitors of Record:

Langlois Kronström Desjardins, Montréal, Quebec, for the applicants, Conférence des juges du Québec et al.;

Cain, Lamarre, Casgrain, Wells, Sept-Iles, Quebec, for the applicant, Conférence des juges municipaux du Québec;

Robinson Sheppard Shapiro, Montréal, Quebec, for the respondents on the motions, the Attorney General of Quebec and the Minister of Justice of Quebec.

These motions were dealt with on the basis of written submissions by McLachlin, C.J.C., Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada. The following decision was delivered by the court, in both official languages, on October 27, 2005.