Richard and Larocque v. Gauvin, (1992) 128 N.B.R.(2d) 281 (TD)

JudgeBoisvert, J.
CourtCourt of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
Case DateApril 27, 1992
JurisdictionNew Brunswick
Citations(1992), 128 N.B.R.(2d) 281 (TD)

Richard v. Gauvin (1992), 128 N.B.R.(2d) 281 (TD);

    128 R.N.-B.(2e) 281; 322 A.P.R. 281

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

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

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

In The Matter Of the trial of a petition to set aside an election in the County of Gloucester, Electoral District of Shippagan-les-Iles and An Inquiry into the conduct of a defeated candidate under s. 42 of the Controverted Elections Act

Between:

Ernest Richard and Dannie David Larocque (petitioners) and Jean Gauvin (respondent) and Aldéa Landry (defeated candidate) and The Attoney General for Canada (intervenor)

(123/91/M)

Indexed As: Richard and Larocque v. Gauvin

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Bathurst

Boisvert, J.

April 27, 1992.

Summary:

Jean Gauvin defeated Aldéa Landry by 50 votes in Shippagan-les-Iles in the Septem­ber 23, 1991 provincial election. The elec­tion was contested by way of a petition under the Controverted Elections Act (N.B.). Jean Gauvin vigorously defended himself and also requested an inquiry into the con­duct of the defeated candidate to determine if she was guilty of corrupt practices.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, in a judgment re­ported at 124 N.B.R.(2d) 271; 312 A.P.R. 271, dismissed the election petition, held an inquiry into the conduct of Aldéa Landry, declared that she was guilty, but not per­sonally, of corrupt practices and confirmed the validity of the election, awarding costs against the petitioners. However, the court postponed the awarding of costs in order to enable counsel to file their briefs on the issue.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, later delivered the following order as to costs.

Elections - Topic 8169

Controverted elections - Procedure - Costs - Jean Gauvin was the successful party in a petition presented by Richard and Larocque to set aside the election in which he had defeated Aldéa Landry by 50 votes - The presiding judge awarded costs against Richard and Larocque - However, he postponed the awarding of costs in order to enable counsel to file their briefs on the issue - The brief filed by Gauvin's counsel indicated that he had presented a bill to his client for legal fees totalling $118,204.85 - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, after considering the whole of the evidence and the circumstances of the case (see para­graphs 4 to 6), awarded costs of $51,500 against Richard and Larocque.

Cases Noticed:

Anderson v. Stewart and Diotte (1921), 62 D.L.R. 98 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 4].

Counsel:

André G. Richard and A. François Daigle, for the petitioners and for Aldéa Landry in the inquiry into the conduct of a defeated candidate;

Michel C. Léger, Jacques Cormier and Roger Bilodeau, for the respondent;

John D. Hazen, for the intervenor.

This petition was heard on January 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 16, 1992, by Boisvert, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Bathurst.

Boisvert, J., delivered the following deci­sion on April 27, 1992.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT