ARCTIC OBITER

ARCTIC OBITER
MAY/J MARCH/APRIL UNE 20112012 V OLUME XVI, XV, ISSUE 32

2 | ARCTIC OBITER
4th Floor, Diamond Plaza
5204 – 50 th Avenue
P.O. Box 1298
Yellowknife, NT
X1A 2N9
TEL: (867) 873-3828
FAX: (867) 873-6344
info@lawsociety.nt.ca
www.lawsociety.nt.ca
PRESIDENT
Cayley J. Thomas
VICE-PRESIDENT
Caroline Wawzonek
SECRETARY
Margo Nightingale
TREASURER
Kelly McLaughlin
LAYPERSON
Peter Hall
INSIDE
8
12
14
Law Week 2012
Celebrating 30 Years of the Charter
The Charter Project
Love It or Hate It, It’s Time
to Join the Discussion
The Well-Kept Secrets of the Law
Foundation
by Karen Lajoie
P.O. Box 1985
Yellowknife, NT
X1A 2P5
TEL: (867) 669-7739
FAX: (867) 873-6344
info@cba-nt.org
cba.org/northwest
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Linda Whitford
linda.whitford@lawsociety.nt.ca
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS
LEGAL EDUCATION COORDINATOR
Ben Russo
ben.russo@lawsociety.nt.ca
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
Shannon Hogan
shannon.hogan@lawsociety.nt.ca
PRESIDENT
Malinda Kellett
VICE PRESIDENT
Glen Rutland
SECRETARY / TREASURER
vacant
PAST PRESIDENT
Elaine Keenan Bengts
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
Sheldon Toner
Caroline Wawzonek
Charlene Doolittle
BettyLou McIlmoyle
Jeannie Wynne-Edwards
Arctic Obiter is a joint publication of the Law Society of
the Northwest Territories and the Northwest Territories
Branch of the Canadian Bar Association. It is published
on a bi-monthly basis to keep lawyers practicing in the
NWT informed of news, announcements, programs and
activities. Comments, articles and photos for
consideration can be submitted to Ben Russo. Past and
current issues are available on the Law Society website.
FROM THE EDITOR
I was born months after the Right Honourable Pierre Trudeau
and Her Majesty the Queen sat down at a small wooden table,
surrounded by hundreds of on-lookers, and made history.
Now, 30 years later, I find myself somewhat speechless about a
document that, for better or for worse, has blanketed my
existence and experience as a Canadian citizen.
The Charter is something that I, and most of my generation and the generations to
follow, have thought little about. It’s taken for granted, with little understanding of
its significance. It is perceived as a universal surety, despite the human injustices
seen regularly around the world. It’s a Canadian trademark, but little regard is
given to the hard work involved in maintaining it. It’s a simple set of human rights
that is surprisingly met with consternation and resistance.
understand this Charter of ours, and all it entails.
I’ve yet to fully
Regardless of whatever the Charter is, and however it is perceived, I look at Law
Day as a day be thankful that, at the very least, I can openly question and discuss
my rights and freedoms, and how my country is governed.
- Ben
3 President’s Message
4 Executive Director’s Message
5 Fraud Prevention
6 Membership News
10 CBA National News
16 NWT Decision Digest
23 Supreme Court of Canada
Update
25 NWT Legislative News
26 Notices
27 Resources

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 3
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
by Cayley J. Thomas
Intervening on Constitutionality Case
This spring has been a very busy season for both the Law
Society staff and members of the Executive.
Positions on Law Society committees are now fully filled,
and most committee work is well underway. Thank you,
everyone who put their name forward for membership on a
committee – we wouldn’t be able to do this important work
without you. In February, Kelly McLaughlin and I met
with the Chairs of the committees to discuss outstanding
issues, including the need to ensure that the committees
have the necessary support from the Executive and Law
Society staff. Another Executive/Committee Chair lunch
meeting will be scheduled in May.
In March, we hosted the winter meeting of the Federation
of Law Societies here in Yellowknife. This allowed the
entire Executive to attend all, or parts of, the conference.
Your Law Society staff worked tirelessly to ensure that
the meetings went off without a hitch, and that all the
participants, and their spouses experienced our northern
hospitality. The LSNT was represented at Federation
meetings by Sheila MacPherson, who replaced Lou Sebert
as the LSNT representative earlier this year. Although I
should have done this before now, I would like to thank
Sheila for agreeing to take on this role, and to thank Lou
for representing us so well on the federation Council.
Some of you may also be aware that, on December 29,
2011, an application was filed in the Nunavut Court of
Justice, challenging the constitutionality of the
subsections of the Rules of the Law Society of Nunavut
(LSNU) dealing with restricted appearance certificates.
The application, which was made on behalf of three
individuals, includes requests for the following relief:
a) A declaration that Rules 49(2)(b) and (g), (3), (4), and
(5) of the Rules of the Law Society of Nunavut and s. 5 of
Schedule A of the Rules are of no force and effect and;
b) A declaration that the requirements under attack
breach s. 520 of the Criminal Code and ss. 6, 7, and 11
(3) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
As only Her Majesty the Queen was named as a
respondent to the application, the LSNU was granted
intervenor status in early 2012.
After careful consideration, we have also decided to
intervene in this application. On April 11, 2012, the LSNT
and the Law Society of the Yukon were both granted
intervenor status. Our application included affidavit
evidence stating that:
“The LSNT has a similar, but not identical
regulatory scheme to the regulatory scheme
set out in the Rules of the Law Society of
Nunavut. The LSNT can present unique
evidence as to the rationale and negotiations
leading to the Territorial Mobility Agreement
and the impact that an adverse finding in
relation to the Territorial Mobility
Agreement would have on its continued
ability to be an independent self-regulating
body.”
This application is in the early stages of case
management, and a hearing date has not been set. If any
member wishes to see the documents that have been filed
on this application, the court file number is 23-12-200
(Chwyl, Niptanatiak & Chmelyk v. the Queen and Nunvut).

4 | ARCTIC OBITER
THE DIRECTOR’S CHAIR
by Linda G. Whitford
Preparing for the New Year
It's April, and that means CLIA meetings, where Insurance
Directors and the Advisory Board meet to discuss all things
“insurance”. I confess a certain amount of trepidation at the
400+ pages of board materials, but a 4-hour flight serves me,
and it, well. It is a good thing there were no movies of
interest to sidetrack my good intentions.
Two things ruminate in my mind from the meeting. First,
how many insured members actually read their policy and
know what is and isn't covered; and second, lawyers are still
falling victim to scams no matter how many times we push
warnings and information about them.
Counterfeit certified cheques are the latest pitfall, and lawyers
in Alberta, Ontario and Quebec have had the misfortune of
falling victim. Debt collection files are all the rage and the
perpetrators are getting savy, using names of real companies
as well as real people. One recently received at our office used
BHP as the company wanting to secure the services of a
lawyer. The first mistake was sending the email to the Law
Society, the second was a mistake in the e-mail address - albeit
minor, it was there.
I cannot stress enough the threat that various forms of fraud
represent. I will not take up space listing all the various
scenarios here, but would urge you to exercise caution and
some due diligence by checking out the following links. You
should also subscribe to the RSS feeds from LawPro and to
CLIA's Law Prevention eBytes.
www.practicepro.ca/practice/fraud.asp
www.avoidaclaim.com
www.CLIA.ca (Loss Prevention eBytes)
There is an 11% increase in the premium rate for insured
members this year, but the local levy has yet to be set by the
Executive. Insured members can expect to receive those
invoices on or about the middle of May with the option to pay
in two installments or in full.
Things at the Law Society are proceeding though the annual
cycle. Renewals are done for another year; the audit is
complete; committees are up and running and we played host
to the Federation of Law Societies Semi-Annual Meeting. It
was a perfect mix of business and pleasure as we examined
Alternative Business Structures and provided our guests with
a unique northern experience at Aurora Village. The northern
lights cooperated and those who took a trip out the Dettah Ice
Road had the best view. Cheers to Dyane for braving a very
cold morning to do a Ragged Ass Road Run with me. She can
now boast that she walked on water as we also ventured out
on the ice road. Hosting an at-home dinner was a highlight;
my thanks to Sheila MacPherson, Cayley Thomas and Paul
Smith for doing likewise.
The special Court Library Review Committee mandated at the
AGM is working overtime, and one of the tools they are using
to determine what resources members require is a
survey. The first version was very thorough, but some felt it
too long. It has been revised, and all are encouraged to
complete it.
Committee Chairs have met with the President and reviewed
the work plan created by the Executive to complete their
various goals and objectives, and a further meeting will be
held the end of May to report progress by the Committees on
the progress of their projects. Insofar as Committee support
and input is required for my end of things, you can expect to
hear from me if you have not done so already.
I made very good use of an almost three-hour flight between
Calgary and Las Vegas to fulfill my promise to Ben to have
this article by the end of the week, and I managed to finish it
poolside at the Bellagio! Considering it is a vacation week, it
has been a busy time, albeit with a little angst as my lifeline
with the office (aka, the Blackberry) remained behind with
Ben. But, so far, highlights include a fabulous Garth Brooks
show, a trip to the Grand Canyon and the Elvis Cirque du
Soleil show.
Until next time....

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 5
FRAUD PREVENTION
Bad Cheque Scams
Fraudsters retain the firm on a contrived
legal matter so that they can run a
counterfeit cheque or bank draft through
the firm trust account and walk away
with real money. These contrived
matters will look real. The fraudster will
provide extensive and very real looking
ID and documents. When the bad
cheque or draft bounces, there will be a
shortfall in the trust account.
COMMON TYPES OF BAD
CHEQUE FRAUD
BUSINESS LOAN /
INVENTORY PURCHASE FRAUD
Targets business lawyers.
Fraudster will ask you to handle a
loan.
Loan proceeds are coming from fake
lender.
SPOUSAL SUPPORT COLLECTION FRAUD
Targets family lawyers.
Fraudster will ask you help with
collection from ex-spouse, often
further to a “collaborative settlement
agreement.”
Ex-spouse will pay up with little or no
pushing.
DEBT COLLECTION FRAUD
Targets litigators.
Fraudster will ask for help with a debt
collection.
Debtor will pay up with little or no
pushing.
RED FLAGS
These are the common red flags that
indicate that a matter is a fraud. Some of
these may occur on legitimate matters,
but if many appear on the same matter
you should heed the warning signs.
Initial contact email is generically
addressed (e.g., “Dear attorney”) and
BCC’d to many people.
Sender email address is different from
address mentioned in body of the
email.
Client uses one or more email
addresses from a free email service
(e.g., Gmail, MSN, Yahoo!), even
when the matter is on behalf of a
business entity.
Client is new to your firm.
Client is in a distant jurisdiction.
Client shows up and wants the matter
completed around banking holidays.
Client prefers email communication
due to time zone differences.
Client provides only a cell number.
Client is in a rush – and pressures you
to “do the deal” quickly.
Client and others involved don’t seem
concerned if shortcuts are taken.
Client is willing to pay higher-thanusual
fees on a contingent basis from
(bogus) funds you are to receive.
Despite the client stating a lawyer is
needed to help push for payment, the
debtor pays without any hassle.
Cheque or bank draft arrives at your
office in plain envelope and/or
without covering letter.
Cheque is drawn from the account of
an entity that appears to be unrelated
(e.g., a spousal arrears payment from
an insurance company or travel
agency).
Payment amounts are different than
expected or change without
explanation.
Client instructs you to quickly wire
the funds to an offshore bank account
or third party that appears unrelated
to the matters.
DIGGING DEEPER
Take these steps to cross-check and
verify information provided to you by
the client.
Cross-check names, addresses, and
phone numbers of the client and other
people/entities involved in the matter
on Google and other search engines.
While the real names of people or
businesses may be used, contact
information on fake documents will
put you in touch with people in
cahoots with the fraudsters.
Do reverse searches on phone
numbers.
Look up addresses using Street View
in Google Maps.
Ask your bank or the issuing bank to
confirm the branch transit number
and cheque are legitimate.
Call the entity making the payment or
loan and ask if they are aware of the
transaction.
Contact the company to confirm it is
expecting debtor’s payment or
business loan.
Hold the funds until your bank
confirms the funds are “good” by
contacting the other bank, and have
the bank confirm, in writing, that it is
safe to withdraw from the deposit.
FROM LAWPRO’S “FRAUD FACT SHEET”:
PRACTICEPRO.CA/PRACTICE/FRAUD.ASP

6 | ARCTIC OBITER
Looking at the
Numbers
The map to the right depicts the
location of all Law Society members as
of April 30, 2012. (A similar map was
generated in the July/August 2009
issue of the Obiter.)
Currently, 30% of the membership
resides in the Northwest Territories.
Of those 138 members, 91% reside in
Yellowknife.
In contrast, roughly 41% of the
Society’s non-resident members, 326 in
total, reside in Edmonton, AB.
As shown above, Edmonton is home to
more members of the NWT Bar than
Yellowknife, and Alberta hosts more
members than all of the NWT.
MEMBERSHIP
NOTE: This map does not account for
m e m b e r s h o l d i n g R e s t r i c t e d
Appearance Certificates.
NEW MEMBERS
NANETTE KUFELDT
CHOMICKI BARIL MAH LLP—EDMONTON, AB
Nanette graduated from the University
of Alberta, Faculty of Law in 2005. She
was admitted to the Alberta Bar in
2006 and shortly thereafter joined
Chomicki Baril Mah as an associate.
Nanette intends to develop her
practice in Insurance Defence
Litigation and related areas.
DEAN RASK
RASK LAW OFFICE—CALGARY, AB
D e a n w a s a d m i t t e d t o t h e
Saskatchewan Bar in 1993, and the
Alberta Bar in 2006.
His practice
i n c l u d e s R e a l E s t a t e , L a n d
Syndication, Wills and Estates and
Commercial/Corporate Law.
JANA SHOEMAKER
YELLOWKNIFE, NT
HART SHOULDICE
YELLOWKNIFE, NT
NOTICES
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION
TAKE NOTICE THAT the following
persons:
DIMOVSKI, Jimmy (Toronto, ON)
DYKSTRA, Kathryn L. (Edmonton, AB)
ECCLES, Peter A. (Vancouver, BC)
NORDIN, Barry (Yellowknife, NT)
STRUEBY, Lisa (Ottawa, ON)
h a v e b e e n s u s p e n d e d f r o m
membership in the Law Society of the
Northwest Territories effective April
1st, 2012 pursuant to Rule 56 of the
Rules of the Law Society of the
Northwest Territories, being the failure
to fulfill the annual renewal
requirements on or before March 31,
2012.
NOTICE OF RESIGNATION
TAKE NOTICE THAT the following
persons:

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 7
NWT Deputy Judge Leaves Mark on the North
IN MEMORIAM
EDWARD WACHOWICH
(JAN 30, 1929 - APR. 10, 2012)
The Honourable Edward Wachowich
died on April 10 after suffering a
stroke. He was 83.
His accomplishments in life were
equaled by his wit and candor, and
humbled by the many friends and colleagues
that simply knew him as Ed.
Ed graduated from the University of
Alberta in 1954. As an articling student,
he was matched against Constantine
Kosowan, a tenured lawyer
ten years his senior. Despite his loss,
his impression on Kosowan led to a
partnership that was negotiated over
post-trial coffee.
During the late 1960s and early 1970s,
Photo credit: Greg Southam (edmontonjournal.com)
among his other clients, Ed served as
lawyer for the Edmonton Eskimos. In
1985, he was appointed provincial
court judge. Following the steps of his
former partner, he ascended to the
position of Chief Judge in 1989.
Ed frequently travelled North to sit as
a Deputy Judge. After his retirement
as Chief Judge of the Provincial Court
of Alberta, Ed continued to sit in the
NWT Courts on a part-time basis.
“I appeared in his Court on a number
of occasions over the years,” said
David MacDonald of MacDonald &
Associates. “Ed was a very patient
Judge who reminded me of the Late
Jim Slaven, former Chief Judge of the
Territorial Court. It was always a
pleasure to appear in their Courts.”
Ed is survived by his wife Lucy, their
children Donna, Rob, Jim, Joe, Peter
and Patricia, six grandchildren and
siblings Victoria, Cecelia, Mary,
Patricia and Allan and nieces, nephews
and extended family.
CLARK, Anne (Mahone Bay, NS)
COLQUHOUN, I. Thomas
(Edmonton, AB)
FFRASER, Brenda (Red Deer, AB)
GAGNON, Denise (Spruce Grove, AB)
GAUNT, Brendan (Edmonton, AB)
HENDERSON, Mary (Calgary, AB)
HUDSON, Clarence (Yellowknife, NT)
JANCZUR, Jacek (Ottawa, ON)
LEMON, Thomas (Toronto, ON)
LINDSEY, Patricia (Ottawa, ON)
LORD, Tyler (Calgary, AB)
O’MARA, Heather (Whitehorse, YK)
PARR, Athony (Montreal, QC)
SAX, L. Leslie (Edmonton, AB)
SHALAGAN, Wayne S. (Calgary, AB)
SINCLAIR, Noel (Whitehorse, YK)
St-GERMAIN, Mathieu (Calgary, AB)
TKATCH, Shelley (Calgary, AB)
VALIELA, Diana (Vancouver, BC)
having indicated that they do not wish
to continue their memberships in the
Law Society of the Northwest
Territories and having voluntarily
submitted their resignation, have been
MEMBERSHIP STATS
Active Residents: 130
Active Non-Residents: 251
Inactive Members: 83
Total Membership: 464
(Restricted Members: 82)
permitted to resign, and their names
have been removed from the Roll of
the Society effective April 1, 2012.
NOTICE OF REINSTATEMENT
TAKE NOTICE THAT the following
person:
DIMOVSKI, Jimmy (Toronto, ON)
has been re-instated as an Inactive
Member in the Law Society of the
Northwest Territories effective April
11, 2012, pursuant to Rule 56 of the
Rules of the Law Society of the
Northwest Territories, being the failure
to fulfill the annual renewal
requirements on or before March 31,
2012.

8 | ARCTIC OBITER
LAW WEEK 2012
Celebrating 30 Years of the Charter
LAW DAY / LAW WEEK, AN INITIATIVE OF
THE CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION, IS
CELEBRATED ACROSS THE COUNTRY ON AND
AROUND APRIL 17TH. THIS YEAR, CANADA
CELEBRATED THE 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE
SIGNING OF THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND
FREEDOMS. THROUGHOUT LAW WEEK, THE
CBA-NT’S YOUNG LAWYERS PUSHED
THEMSELVES TO GET THE WORD OUT TO
RESIDENTS IN YELLOWKNIFE AND THE NWT.
THE FOLLOWING ARE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE
EVENTS.
LAW: TOLL-FREE
The NWT’s Law Line was, at one
point, a very popular resource for
those seeking free legal information
and guidance. Due to limited
resources, however, the service was
discontinued. Throughout Law Week,
the NWT Branch of the CBA was able
to temporarily revive the service and,
with the generous support of
Northwestel, a toll-free number led
NWT residents to a lawyer everyday
between 5:00pm and 7:00pm.
In line with the CBA’s focus on access
to justice this year, the Young
Lawyers intend to see this service
revived permanently. “We hope to
run this service on a more regular
basis with the help of our member
volunteers,” said Karin Taylor, Chair
of the Young Lawyers. “Stay tuned!”
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, CHARTER!
A 30th Anniversary is not complete
without cake, so the CBA-NT took the
party to the streets in downtown
Yellowknife. The Honourable Glen
Abernethy, Minister of Justice, and
his Worship Gordon Van Tighem,
Mayor of Yellowknife, joined CBA-NT
President Malinda Kellett, Past-
President Elaine Keenan Bengts, and
Karin Taylor as they handed out cake,
coffee, hot chocolate and bracelets to
the people of Yellowknife.
Despite
the cold, everyone was in good spirits,
and many lunch-goers stopped by to
find out more about the Charter.
COOKIES, TREATS
AND LEGAL TERMINOLOGY
An annual staple of Law Week is the
Bake Sale and Legal Information
Booth, held at Yellowknife’s Centre
Square Mall.
This year, a total of
$400.00 was raised for Yellowknife’s
Betty House, making it the most
profitable bake sale on record. Shirley
Walsh’s cheesecake muffins earned
her first prize (bragging rights) for the
most popular treat. Leanne Dragon’s
HAPPY BIRTHDAY! [left] Karin Taylor and Malinda Kellett slice into the anniversary cake. [right] The Hon. Glen Abernethy, Karin
Taylor, Mayor Gordon Van Tighem, and Malinda Kellett show off their “I Love the Charter” shirts.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 9
The Law Week
HALL OF FAME
The CBA-NT Young Lawyers would
like to recognize the volunteers who
made this year’s Law Week events
possible:
LAW LINE
Jeannette Savoie
Emerald Murphy
Valerie Conrad
Brian Asmundson
Sandra MacKenzie
Gilese Turner
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: [left] Shirley Walsh and
Karin Taylor get caught in a sales pitch while
Jeannette Savoie discusses the law.
peanut butter bites were a close
second, and Kelly McLaughlin’s
brownies came in third. Austin
Marshall’s perfectly aged
fruitcake earned him an
honourable mention.
The Free Legal Information
Booth, with materials and
publications outnumbering bake sale
items five-to-one, connected
approximately 25 people with local
poverty lawyer Jeannette Savoie, who
was on-hand to provide information
on a number of topics and direct
people on the right path for their legal
issues.
In all, the noon-hour event
sent people back to work with a tasty
treat and piece of mind.
KARAOKE NIGHT
The place to be to end the Law Week
celebrations was at the Elks’ Club in
Yellowknife, where lawyers took the
stage to sing their favourites. At the
end of the night, after plenty of laughs
and incredible fundraising efforts, a
total of $505.00 was raised for Betty
House. A special thank-you goes to
all the talented performers, and the
audience, for a job well done.
For more information on Law Week,
visit cba.org/lawday.
BAKE SALE & INFO BOOTH
Karin Taylor
Shirley Walsh
Jeannette Savoie
Ramona Sladic
Garth Wallbridge
Leanne Dragon
Lana Birch-Rideout
Caroline Wawzonek
Lynn Hjartarson
Erin Delaney
Amy Groothuis
Kelly McLaughlin
Austin Marshall
Jeannie Wynne-Edwards
Donna Keats
Pauline Baisley
KARAOKE NIGHT
Kelly McLaughlin
BIRTHDAY CAKE
Karin Taylor
Elaine Bengts
Malinda Kellett

10 | ARCTIC OBITER
CBA NATIONAL NEWS
CBA Holds Law
Day and Charter
Celebrations
Across Canada
From BC to Newfoundland and the
territories, the CBA recently held
numerous events to recognize Law
Day and the 30th anniversary of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms.
To celebrate the Charter’s birthday,
flash mobs were held in Winnipeg,
Ottawa, and London, Ontario on
April 17th. “We decided to do a dance
flash mob to celebrate and bring
awareness of this special anniversary
of the Charter in a fun and
contemporary way,” explained John
Hoyles, Chief Executive Officer of the
CBA.
By all accounts, the flash mobs were a
success. But don’t take our word for it
– check out the videos and photos on
the CBA’s Facebook page at
w w w . f a c e b o o k . c o m /
CanadianBarAssociation. Be sure to
“like” us and keep us in your
newsfeed!
Connect @ Vancouver
The only national gathering of
Canada’s legal community, the
Canadian Legal Conference (CLC)
takes place in Vancouver Aug. 12-14,
2012. Whether you’re in a firm, or are
a sole practitioner, in-house, or
government lawyer, there are many
reasons to attend the CLC – here are
just a few:
Earn 12 hours of professional
development credit. Some of the top
legal minds in the country are
presenters at this year’s PD sessions.
With 15 PD programs and 12
corporate counsel workshops offered
over a two day period, the CLC is a
one-stop shop to meet CPD
requirements.
Network with colleagues from across
Canada. Connect with your peers at
breakfasts, receptions, entertainment,
late night parties, and the everpopular
at-home dinners.
Soak in the stunning sights &
sounds of one of the world’s top
cities. Nestled between mountains
and ocean, Vancouver is frequently
ranked as one of the best cities to visit.
Between events, enjoy world class
dining, shopping, and art galleries, or
hike through spectacular Stanley Park
and its circling Seawall.
Visit www.cba.org/Vancouver2012
for more details and to register for
CLC 2012.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 11
New CBA/PBLO project highlights
importance of access to justice
As part of its ongoing commitment to
access to justice, the CBA has joined
forces with Pro Bono Law Ontario
(PBLO) and the Supreme Court of
Canada to provide pro bono legal
services to low-income, selfrepresented
Ontarians seeking leave to
appeal at the Supreme Court of
Canada.
The project, initiated at the request of
the Supreme Court, will eliminate
access to justice barriers in Ontario by
helping eligible litigants determine the
merits of their leave applications and
offer assistance to those with the
potential for success.
Aiming to
implement the project nation-wide, the
CBA plans to engage with pro bono
groups across Canada.
At the project’s launch reception on
April 5 in Toronto, former Supreme
Court Judge Ian Binnie praised the
PBLO/CBA’s new initiative. “Access to
justice is a national concern and one
that preoccupies our Supreme Court.
The assistance of voluntary lawyers
who are knowledgeable in Supreme
Court procedures will make a world of
difference to individual citizens who
lack the know-how and resources to
carry their claims forward without it.”
To read the full press release, visit
www.pblo.org.
Protecting
Solicitor-Client
Privilege
Appearing before the Senate
Committee on Banking, Trade and
Commerce on April 4, the CBA has
once again spoken out in defense of
solicitor-client privilege during the
Committee’s five year review of the
Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist
Financing Act.
Ron Skolrood of Vancouver, a
member of the CBA’s Working Group
on Proceeds of Crime, explained
while the CBA supports the
government’s attempts to combat
money laundering, these efforts must
not interfere with the public’s right to
consult a lawyer in confidence.
Young Lawyers International Program
A group of nine young lawyers
recently visited the CBA National
Office in Ottawa after completing sixmonth
internships with the CBA’s
Young Lawyers International
Program (YLIP).
The group was in town to debrief and
share their experiences in the
program. With funding from the
Canadian International Development
Agency, YLIP last year sent 19 young
lawyers to legal organizations in
South Africa, Kenya, Namibia,
Colombia, and Guyana with the
overall goal of expanding human
rights in these developing nations.
While the YLIP links
international human
rights organizations
with talented young
lawyers looking to
make meaningful
contributions abroad,
it also gives new
lawyers a chance to
gain unparalleled
work experience in the
human rights field.
To learn more about the program and
view photos from the lawyers’ trips,
visit www.cba.org/CBA/IDP/yiip/.

12 | ARCTIC OBITER
LAW WEEK
Love It or Hate It, It’s Time to Join the Discussion
WINDSOR LAW GRADUATES LAUNCH HIGH-PROFILE CHARTER EDUCATIONAL PROJECT
As millions today around the world are protesting for basic
freedoms, on April 17, 2012, Canadians will mark 30 years
with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a document which
seeks to guarantee fundamental human rights, from speech,
to religion, to association.
discussion about rights without the fear of being persecuted.
We’re having a discussion in an open forum in Canada,
while at the same time, other people around the world are
killed for their beliefs,” says Byron Pascoe, The Charter
Project Co-Founder and Co-Chair. “Along with rights come
responsibilities. As students privileged to
study the law, we have a responsibility to play
an active role in ensuring that all members of
our community at large have access to justice,
including education of the law.”
The Charter Project team has produced Public
Service Announcement videos starring
Canadian celebrities, such as Rick Mercer,
Howie Mandel, Kristen Kreuk, Hayley
Wickenheiser, Rick Hansen, Paul Gross, Sitara
Hewitt, Alex Trebek, Mike Holmes, Sarah
Slean, Ron James, Vanessa Lengies, Alexz
Johnson, Nazanin Afshin-Jam Mackay, Jill
Barber, Wide Mouth Mason, Adamo Ruggiero,
Elvira Kurt, Serena Ryder and Kreesha Turner.
These PSAs will be distributed across Canada
on TV, in Cineplex theatres, and online, etc.
At the University of Windsor, Faculty of Law, the Class of
2012 realized that their graduation coincided with the
Charter’s 30th anniversary and decided to do something to
recognize it.
The Charter Project is a nationwide educational and public
awareness campaign with a goal to involve Canadians in a
dialogue about their rights and freedoms. The ever-evolving
Charter has an impact on every one of us. The Charter’s
anniversary is a great time to recognize that - as a nation -
we have achievements to celebrate, failures to address, and
questions to ask about our Charter thirty years later.
“Canada is the best country in the world to live in for many
reasons, including the fact that we can have an open
The students have also filmed interviews of
legal experts with diverse opinions about the Charter, such as
Supreme Court judges, politicians involved in the drafting of
the Charter, rights advocacy lawyers, and law professors.
These interviews will also be available on
www.JoinTheDiscussion.ca, inviting people to comment in
the forums and spark discussion.
“It’s not often that legal education takes a viral or multimedia
form. From the beginning we wanted to educate and
engage people, so we thought: why not entertain them at the
same time? The public consumes information on multimedia
platforms and in interactive ways. We wanted to
make Charter education as accessible and user-friendly as we
could,” says The Charter Project Co-Founder and Co-Chair
Michael O’Brien.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 13
The Charter Project has also created educational workshops
which, in partnership with the Canadian Bar Association,
will be distributed to high schools nationally for Law Day
2012 and beyond. As Michael O’Brien explains, “Education
has been a mandate since The Charter Project’s inception.
The workshops that we developed are
tailored specifically to high school
students and pertain to various
sections of the Charter and how they
impact the everyday lives of
Canadians. These workshops are
turnkey operations that can be
facilitated by teachers across the
country.”
On March 13, 2012, The Charter Project
held its Official Launch at Osgoode Hall
in Toronto; the Launch Event was sponsored by the Law
Society of Upper Canada. His Honour, the Honourable
David C. Onley, Lieutenant Governor of Ontario, delivered
the key note address. Welcoming remarks were also
provided by the Honourable Roy McMurtry, former Chief
Justice of the Ontario Court of Appeal and former Attorney
General of Ontario.
What do you think about equality? Where do you stand on
free speech? Who benefits from language rights? What are
Aboriginal rights, and does the Charter protect these rights?
In a land as diverse as ours, the Charter unites us all as
Canadians. It’s our Country. Our Constitution.
THE DISCUSSION.
The Charter Project first received national coverage when it
was featured as an Honourable Mention on CTV’s Question
Period on March 4, 2012.
The Charter Project, a registered charity, is run
by 40 Windsor Law student volunteers. It has
received financial sponsorship from the Law
Foundation of Ontario, McCarthy Tétrault
LLP, Greenspan Humphrey Lavine, the
County of Carleton Law Association,
and multiple personal donors. For
more information please visit
www.JoinTheDiscussion.ca
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
The Charter Project, an entirely student run organization at
the University of Windsor, was implemented to increase
awareness and engage Canadians in a discussion about the
rights afforded to them by this historic legislation. The
Education Branch of the Charter Project has carefully
structured in-class workshops designed to stimulate
discussion and engage students towards a greater
appreciation for a document that is emblematic of the
Canadian identity. High school teachers across Canada are
encouraged to visit www.charterproject.ca/teach to
download the workshops and run them in their classrooms.
What kind of impact has the Charter had on your life? JOIN
We’ve made great insurance protection even better!
The Canadian Bar Insurance Association (CBIA) is pleased to announce a new Disability Income Insurance policy with significantly improved
benefits and more options. In addition, our group buying power and no-profit pricing goal could help you save 15% or more on your insurance
rates when compared to similar personally owned policies.
Your ability to earn a living is your most valuable asset. Protect yourself with quality, low-cost CBIA Disability Income Insurance protection. Visit
www.barinsurance.com for more details or call us at 1-888-873-2986 to be connected with your local CBIA Sales Representative.

14 | ARCTIC OBITER
TRUST MONEY
The Well-Kept Secrets of the Law Foundation
by Karen Lajoie, Director, NWT Law Foundation
The Law Foundation was created 30 years ago pursuant to
Part VII of the Legal Profession Act to encourage research and
initiatives that enhance access to justice and the public’s
understanding of our legal system, including law reform
research, maintaining law libraries, contributing to legal
education, and work on PLEI initiatives.
The Foundation achieves these goals largely through
financial contributions to outside organizations. Since 1982,
the Foundation has awarded grants totaling $2,769,107 to
hundreds of worthy recipients who have made a real
difference in the North. It has also awarded scholarships
totaling $212,000 to nearly four
dozen Northerners attending
law school, many of whom
have returned to practice
North of 60. I am fortunate
to say that I am one of those
scholarship recipients, and I
can tell you first-hand what a
d i f f e r e n c e r e c e i v i n g
scholarship money made
during my legal education,
so it is a particular honour
for me to now be a twoterm
Director of the
Foundation, participating
in the decision-making
process for a new generation
of applicants.
All of the money the Foundation
administers comes from you; more
specifically, from your trust
accounts. By law, any interest
generated by a trust account must
be paid by your bank to the
Foundation twice annually. With the current economic
climate showing interest rates hovering around zero percent,
it might not seem like much, but last year, just over $46,000
was paid to the Foundation in trust interest.
That, coupled with interest generated on Foundation
investments, allowed us to make annual grants in the
$130,000 range, and award thousands of dollars in
scholarships.
In 2010-11, the Foundation awarded grants in five areas:
$10,000 to the Law Society of the NWT to assist in defraying
registration fees for NWT students
doing their bar admissions
courses;
$13,624 to the Canadian
Legal Information Institute
(CanLII) to continue
building the virtual law
library that makes access to
court cases, legislation, and
tribunal decisions available
online, free of charge, to the
public;
$70,000 to the Yellowknives
Dene First Nation to assist
with a Community Justice
Initiatives Program serving
t h r e e N o r t h S l a v e
communities. The money is
used for diversion and restorative
justice programs, family violence
workshops, drug/alcohol support
programs, and a host of alternative
approaches to court.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 15
Choosing the Right Bank for Your Trust Accounts
If you’re in private practice and do more than legal aid work,
you’ve got a trust account. Any interest that the account
generates is to be paid, by law, to the NWT Law Foundation semiannually
under the Legal Profession Act, s.57(2).
Not all trust accounts are equal, however, so it bears taking a few
minutes to assess what your bank is doing for you, and whether or
not you could be doing a better job generating interest on those
trust monies.
It is the lawyer’s obligation to instruct their bank to remit any
interest earned on the trust monies to the Law Foundation every
six months. Every year during the audit process, we discover a few
lawyers who have been receiving the interest back into the trust
account, which is verboten under the Act. Please review your bank
statements carefully in order to be sure the interest is not going
back into the account, and check with the bank periodically to
make sure the interest is actually being paid to the Law
Foundation.
Currently, the five banks operating in the NWT have slightly
different rates of return – ScotiaBank is offering prime less 3%,
effectively zero interest. The other four – Bank of Montreal, CIBC,
Royal Bank, and TD – are all offering 0.25%. When dealing with
your bank, please insist on getting the highest return possible –
low interest has a direct effect on the work the Law Foundation
can support year to year.
We rely on your diligence, so please take a couple of minutes to
make sure your part of the system is working the way it is
supposed to. Students and community groups thank you for your
efforts.
$50,000 to the GNWT to maintain the M.M. de Weerdt court
library; and
$5,000 to the Native Law Centre at the University of
Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, to assist and encourage
Aboriginal people to enter the study of law.
Also in 2011, the scholarship program was changed to
provide financial incentives for Northern law students to
return home post-graduation. Under these new rules, eligible
applicants receive a non-repayable grant of $2,000 per year
for each of three years while attending law school. If they
return to the NWT to article, and continue to work post-call
in the NWT for one year, the scholarship fund will assist
them in the amount of $7,000 for each of those first two years,
for an overall commitment of $20,000 per student.
For the 2011/2012 academic year, four students have received
scholarships.
Please help us continue to fund these innovative projects and
dedicated students. We rely on your trust account interest to
make this possible.

16 | ARCTIC OBITER
NWT DECISION DIGEST
by Maureen McGuire, Appellate Counsel, Alberta Justice
COURT OF APPEAL
CIVIL PROCEDURE - APPLICATION
TO STRIKE REPLY – AMENDMENT
OF STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Bell Mobility v Anderson
2012 NWTCA 4 (CanLII) | February 14, 2012
Presiding: Justice J.E. Côté
Justice C. Hunt
Justice F.F. Slatter
For the Appellants: R.J.C. Deane, B.W. Dixon
For the Respondents: K.M. Landy, S.S. Marr
The respondents are plaintiffs in a class
action against the appellant, Bell
Mobility.
Their statement of claim
alleged that Bell was unjustly enriched
as a result of charging for 911 services
not provided.
In its statement of
defence, Bell responded that it had
incurred expenses setting up the
physical potential for 911 services. The
plaintiffs then filed a reply, stating that
the 911 fees vastly exceeded those
expenses. Bell brought an application
to strike the reply on the basis that it
was raising a new claim.
The
application was dismissed (2011
NWTSC 40) on the basis that unjust
enrichment remained the cause of
action. Bell appealed.
Appeal allowed – While both the
statement of claim and reply speak of
unjust enrichment, the two claims are
different and intended as alternatives.
While amendment may be a remedy to
striking out, amendement was not
permitted here as the new claim in the
reply disclosed no reasonable cause of
action.
CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENCE –
CONFESSIONS – CHARTER OF
RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS - RIGHT TO
COUNSEL – EXCLUSION OF
EVIDENCE
R v KWJ
2012 NWTCA 3 (CanLII) | February 15, 2012
Presiding: Justice P.W.L. Martin
Justice P.A. Rowbotham
Justice B.K. O’Ferrall
For the Appellant: M. Lecorre,
For the Respondent: B. Berish, QC
The respondent was arrested and read
his rights before being transported to
the nearest RCMP station.
At the
station he was provided a list of
lawyers, but said he didn’t know any of
them so the list was of no use to him.
He asked to call his wife and was told
by police he could call her later.
He
then briefly spoke with a Legal Aid
lawyer by phone.
He was then was
interviewed and gave an inculpatory
statement.
The trial judge found a
violation of the right to counsel and
excluded the statement, leading to an
acquittal. The Crown appealed.
Appeal allowed – The trial judge’s
finding that the police ought to have
known the accused wanted to call his
wife in order to obtain her assistance to
contact counsel was unreasonable.
Unless a detainee explains why he
wishes to contact a third party, neither
the police, nor the court, should assume
the underlying purpose is to facilitate
access to counsel. Even if there was a
THE DECISIONS IN THIS DIGEST ARE LINKED TO THE ARCHIVED DECISIONS ON
CANLII. ALTERNATIVELY, THESE DECISIONS ARE FREELY AVAILABLE AT THE GNWT
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WEBSITE: http://www.justice.gov.nt.ca/
Charter violation, the trial judge erred in
excluding the statement on the basis of
a “Collins-Stillman approach”. The trial
judge’s application of the incorrect legal
test for the exclusion of evidence
warranted a new trial.
CIVIL PROCEDURE – DISMISSAL FOR
WANT OF PROSECUTION –
CONSIDERATION OF SETTLEMENT
DISCUSSIONS
Kell v Senych (Estate)
2012 NWTCA 5 (CanLII) | March 8, 2012
Presiding: Justice Fruman
Justice R.S. Veale
Justice K.G. Ritter
For the Appellant: self-represented
For the Respondent (Senych): E. Keenan Bengts
For the Respondent (NWTHC): S. Toner
The appellant commenced an action in
March 1996, claiming she had been
unlawfully ejected from her residence in
1995. She filed an amended statement
of claim in July 1998.
Statements of
defence were filed by the respondents
in 1998.
Correspondence regarding
settlement was exchanged between
January and June 1999. The appellant
rejected an offer in May 2002. In June
2003, the respondents applied to
dismiss the claim for want of
prosecution. The application was
granted.
Appeal dismissed – The chambers judge
applied the three part test: 1) has there
been any inordinate delay?
2) is the
delay inexcusable? 3) is the defendant
likely to be seriously prejudiced by the
delay? There was no evidence to explain
why it took so long to realize that
further settlement discussions were
fruitless, or to suggest that anyone had
an expectation at any time that

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 17
settlement was imminent or likely.
There was no error in the chambers
judge’s decision.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – JURY
SELECTION – CHALLENGE FOR
CAUSE PROCEDURE –
INTERCEPTION OF PRIVATE
COMMUNICATIONS – BAD
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
R v Bulatci
2012 NWTCA 6 (CanLII) | April 13, 2012
Presiding: Justice J.E. Côté
Justice C. Hunt
Justice F.F. Slatter
For the Appellant: C.B. Davison
For the Respondent: C. Greenwood, G. Boyd
The appellant was convicted of first
degree murder of a RCMP constable. A
challenge for cause based on pretrial
publicity was permitted and each
potential juror was asked five or six
questions. The fifth question asked if
the potential juror had formed any
opinion about the guilt or innocence of
the accused. If the answer was yes, the
potential juror was asked if he or she
could set that opinion aside and decide
the case based on the evidence.
response was limited to yes or no.
The
At trial, the Crown adduced evidence of
communications between the appellant
and his family in a secure visiting room
at the correctional centre. The wiretap
authorization did not specify a
detention facility in the places where
interceptions could be intercepted. The
trial judge held the interception was
authorized by the “used or resorted to”
provision, and in any event the
interceptions should not be excluded
under s. 24(2) of the Charter even if there
was a breach.
The Crown tendered interceptions of
the appellant encouraging others to
engage in witness tampering. The
Crown conceded the evidence was not
probative of intent for murder, but
argued it was relevant to assessing the
credibility of the appellant, who had
indicated he would testify at trial. The
trial judge ruled the statements
admissible, and gave a robust charge to
the jury on the use that could be made
of the evidence.
Appeal dismissed – The trial judge has
wide discretion to supervise a challenge
for cause process and his ruling was
reasonable.
A residual “used or
resorted to” provision in a wiretap
authorization is valid.
While it is
desirable to specifically mention in the
authorization any places interception is
intended, the failure to specifically list
all locations a target may reasonably
and probably resort does not make
those interceptions unauthorized. The
mischief to be guarded against is
permitting the police to intercept
communications randomly, without
reasonable and probable grounds, and
without prior judicial screening.
The
trial judge did not err in admitting the
conversations.
The credibility of the
appellant at trial was critical. Evidence
about the character and trustworthiness
of the appellant was therefore of
importance to the jury, and the evidence
of witness tampering was admissible on
The Canadian Legal Information Institute
Making Canadian law accessible for
free on the internet.
www.canlii.org
the issue of credibility.
An accused
cannot expect to be able to testify and
not have any negative aspects of his
character brought up.
It was not an
error for the trial judge to rule the
probative value of this evidence
outweighed its prejudicial effect.
Hunt JA (concurring): The interception
of communications in the detention
facility breached s. 8 of the Charter, but
the evidence was admissible under s. 24
(2).
SUPREME COURT
EVIDENCE – HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS
– RES GESTAE – PRINCIPLED
EXCEPTION
R v Courouble
2012 NWTSC 8 (CanLII) | January 12, 2012
Presiding: Justice L. Charbonneau
For the Crown: A. Godfrey, B. MacPherson
For the Accused: T. Boyd
In a sexual assault trial, the Crown
sought to adduce evidence of an
utterance made by the complainant and
overheard by her son.
The son had
been sleeping and awoke to hear a
smacking noise and his mother saying
“Stop. You are not doing that.” Upon
hearing that, the son went to the living
room and found the accused on top of
his mother. The complainant had
testified that she was intoxicated and
had no memory of anything prior to her
son pulling the accused off of her.
Application granted – The utterance
was alleged to have been made at the
time of the incident, at a time where the
complainant would not have even
known that it might be overheard. It
was also made close to the time that she
was struck. This makes it as

18 | ARCTIC OBITER
spontaneous and contemporaneous as
can be. Concerns about accuracy and
reliability are for the trier of facts. The
utterance would also be admissible
under the principled approach:
It is
necessary because the complainant has
no memory.
It is sufficiently reliable
because of the spontaneous nature,
because the complainant had no way of
knowing her utterance would be heard,
and because the photos of the
c o m p l a i n a n t ’ s i n j u r i e s w e r e
corroborative of the smacking noise
heard.
CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING -
ASSAULT
R v Courouble
2012 NWTSC 10 (CanLII) | January 13, 2012
Presiding: Justice L. Charbonneau
For the Crown: A. Godfrey
For the Accused: T. Boyd
The offender was found guilty of
assault after a jury trial, and sentenced
to nine months’ imprisonment and one
year probation – This assault was at the
high end of seriousness for a common
assault.
insignificant.
The injury caused was not
The complainant’s eyes
were swollen shut and there was
significant bruising on her face. There
was nothing mitigating. The offender
had criminal record including two prior
serious crimes of violence. Because of
the seriousness of the assault and the
offender’s prior criminal record a
conditional sentence would not be
consistent with the principles and
purposes of sentencing.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – JUDICIAL
INTERIM RELEASE – PRIMARY AND
TERTIARY GROUNDS
R v Moore
2012 NWTSC 14 | May 19, 2011
Presiding: Justice J.E. Richard
For the Crown/Respondent: D. Vaillancourt
For the Accused/Applicant: J. Chadi
The applicant faced serious charges of
possession of cocaine and marijuana for
purposes of trafficking.
He had no
criminal record. He had been detained
since his arrest eleven months
previously. A preliminary inquiry was
held in November 2010, and dates were
set for pretrial motions in August. The
applicant was represented on this
application but did not have legal
representation for trial.
filed materials for his
He had not
Charter
applications, contrary to the court’s
direction.
Application granted – The accused’s ties
to the jurisdiction are tenuous and there
exists a real flight risk concern given the
seriousness of the charges.
However,
primary ground concerns could be
addressed by a $30,000 recognizance
with a $15,000 cash deposit and a
surety. The fact that no trial date has
yet been set was due to the actions or
inactions of the accused. He is avoiding
trial. To authorize his release in these
circumstances could erode the public’s
confidence in our justice system.
However, it is not necessary to detain
him.
The court can address the
concerns by directions or orders
requiring the accused to meet deadlines.
CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING –
RULE AGAINST MULTIPLE
CONVICTIONS
R v Modeste
2012 NWTSC 16 (CanLII) | February 15, 2012
Presiding: Justice L. Charbonneau
For the Crown: A. Paquin
For the Defence: B. Rattan
The 48 year old Aboriginal offender was
found guilty after trial of assault
causing bodily harm, assault with a
weapon and failure to remain at the
scene of an accident. The offender, on
his snowmobile, ran the victim down,
breaking his leg. He then stopped and
looked at the victim for a few seconds,
News
Events
Publications
Forms
www.lawsociety.nt.ca
It’s all online.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 19
but then drove away. By the time of
sentencing, the offender and victim had
apologized to each other. The offender
had a prior criminal record including
three prior assaults and one prior
weapons offence.
The legal elements of assault causing
bodily harm and assault with a weapon
are different.
Although the factual
nexus is clearly present, the legal nexus
is not. Therefore convictions entered on
both offences.
However, separate
consecutive sentences were not imposed
because the offences arise from the
same events.
Sentence of 17 months’ imprisonment
plus one year driving prohibition
imposed – Although the use of a
snowmobile is a serious aggravating
factor in this case, the sentence must not
be so long as to be counterproductive
and simply be a blind expression of the
Court’s denunciation of the conduct.
CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING –
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
R v Lennie
2012 NWTSC 15 (CanLII) | February 9, 2012
Presiding: Justice L. Charbonneau
For the Crown: D. Vaillancourt
For the Accused: T. Bock
Aboriginal offender convicted of
aggravated assault after trial by jury.
The offender stabbed the victim in the
arm, inside a house during a birthday
party. The offender then went outside
the house and the victim followed him
to confront him, but saw the offender
was still holding the knife and ran
away. The offender chased the victim
and stabbed him in the back and neck as
he was trying to get away.
Offender sentenced to two years less a
day imprisonment plus 18 months’
probation – When it comes to crimes of
violence, especially those involving the
use of a potentially lethal weapon,
deterrence and denunciation are
important. Considering the offender’s
young age and the fact he does not have
a significant criminal record,
rehabilitation should not be overlooked.
The offender has faced systemic factors
unfortunately common to aboriginal
people in this jurisdiction, and this
contributed to his use of alcohol and his
coming into conflict with the law.
However, when it comes to serious
crimes of violence, there are limits to
how taking those factors into account
can impact on the ultimate sentencing
decision.
The importance of having
communities that are free from violence
exists in aboriginal communities as
much as it does in non-aboriginal
communities. Consideration was given
to six months of pretrial custody served.
CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING –
SEXUAL ASSAULT
R v KRM
2012 NWTSC 17 (CanLII) | February 24, 2012
Presiding: Justice L. Charbonneau
For the Crown: J. Andrews
For the Accused: T. Bock
The 17 year old victim was a babysitter
and the cousin of the offender’s spouse.
After babysitting one night, she spent
the night at the offender’s home. She
awoke to the offender touching her on
the legs, thighs and buttocks. He was
intoxicated and asked her if she wanted
to smoke marijuana with him. She
refused and asked him to leave, which
he did. The victim returned to sleep but
was awoken again by the offender
removing her pants and underwear. He
then kissed her genitals and had forced
sexual intercourse with her. The offence
had severe consequences for the victim.
The offender pleaded guilty and
expressed remorse.
Sentence of two years less a day
imprisonment plus 18 months’
probation imposed – The starting point
for this type of offence is three years.
The age of the victim was an
aggravating factor, as was the breach of
trust. The third aggravating factor was
the fact the victim was asleep.
The
fourth was the persistence shown by the
offender returning after he was told to
leave. The guilty plea had considerable
mitigating effect, even when entered at
the eleventh hour. When dealing with a
serious offence, there is less possibility
the sentence imposed on an Aboriginal
offender will be different than the
sentence imposed on a non-Aboriginal
offender. The importance of upholding
the dignity and personal safety of all
members of the community is an
important value in both Aboriginal and
n o n - A b o r i g i n a l c o m m u n i t i e s .
Consideration was given to 230 days
pretrial custody served.
REAL PROPERTY – REMOVAL OF
CAVEAT
Engle v Carswell
2012 NWTSC 18 | February 29, 2012
Supplementary reasons: 2012 NWTSC 21 (March
8, 2012), 2012 NWTSC 25 (March 28, 2012)
Presiding: Justice S. Smallwood
For the Applicant: J. Thorlakson
For the Respondent: self-represented
The applicant sought removal of a
caveat registered by his ex-wife against

20 | ARCTIC OBITER
the title of the matrimonial home. The
parties had a pre-nuptual agreement,
and the respondent had registered a
caveat against title to the home as a
beneficial owner pursuant to that
a g r e e m e n t . T h e r e s p o n d e n t ’ s
entitlement under the agreement was to
one-half the value of the property and
not the property itself.
The property
was registered in the name of the
applicant, and control over the
disposition of the property was left
e x c l usively t o t h e a p p l i c a n t .
Application allowed, with an order that
the proceeds of sale be paid into court
pending determination of whether the
respondent is entitled to any of the
proceeds.
INSURANCE LAW – DUTY TO
DEFEND – WAIVER AND ESTOPPEL
Personal Insurance Company v
Richinger
2012 NWTSC 19 (CanLII) | March 2, 2012
Presiding: Justice V.A. Schuler
For the Applicant: G. Holan
For the Respondent (Richinger): B. Comba
For the Respondent (Osmond): P. Sacha,
For the Respondent (Co-operators): D. Shepherd
Application by the insurer for a
declaration that it has no obligation to
defend or indemnify the insured’s
estate in respect of an action related to a
motor vehicle collision.
There was
evidence the collission was deliberately
caused by the insured, to commit
suicide and kill his two young
daughters.
The respondents argued
that because the applicant has already
undertaken defence of the actions it has
waived its right to deny coverage or is
estopped from asserting that right.
None of the parties disputed that s. 35
of the Insurance Act applies, subject to
waiver and estoppel.
Application dismissed - An insurer
should be presumed to know both its
policy and the laws that govern its
business. The applicant had sufficient
knowledge of the facts that made s. 35
applicable to this case before it
undertook the defence of the estate. It
knew or must be deemed to know its
rights when it made that election. Had
the applicant wanted to reserve itself
the right to deny indemnity and
defence, it should have taken the steps
normally taken in its industry.
The
applicant did not obtain or attempt to
obtain a non-waiver agreement, nor did
it provide a reservation of rights letter.
In pursuing the defence of the claims, it
must be taken to have waived its rights
under s 35 of the Act.
Unlike waiver, estoppel requires the
insured establish prejudice.
Prejudice
may be inferred from circumstances,
such as the inability to control the
defence of a claim. Prejudice should be
inferred in this case as the issue was
raised three years after the action
commenced and after examinations for
discovery had been completed and one
claim partially settled.
therefore also applies.
FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT –
SETTING ASIDE DOMESTIC
AGREEMENT
Benwell v Villebrun
2012 NWTSC 20 (CanLII) | March 2, 2012
Presiding: Justice K. Shaner
for the Applicant: J. Walsh
For the Respondent: self-represented
Estoppel
Application by the father to have the
child support provisions of a domestic
agreement set aside and for an order
directing child support in accordance
with the Child Support Guidelines. In
2007 the respondent initiated
proceedings seeking child support in
accordance with the Guidelines. That
application was adjourned when the
parties entered into an agreement
including child support provisions. The
applicant was not represented by
counsel at the time of that agreement.
Application allowed - The law
recognizes it is important to respect the
agreements reached by parents and
spouses upon the dissolution of the
family unit. To do so encourages
settlement outside of court. These
agreements will not be set aside without
good reason. However the law
recognizes that circumstances may
change and that sometimes people enter
into agreements that are unreasonable
or unfair without realizing it at the time.
The Act therefore permits the Court to
set aside provisions of an agreement in
certain circumstances. Under s. 74(4)(b)
of the Act, a provision can be set aside
where a party did not understand the
nature or consequences of the provision.
While the applicant understood the
nature of the provision it was not clear
he understood the consequence that he
was paying almost twice what was
required by law. Nothing on the face of
the agreement indicated the amount of
support proposed was nearly double
what was required. It was therefore
appropriate to set aside the provision in
the agreeement. An order for support
was made and arrears adjusted in
accordance with the Guidelines.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 21
CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING –
BEING UNLAWFULLY IN A
DWELLING HOUSE – BREAK &
ENTER – BREACH OF UNDERTAKING
R v Wedzin
2012 NWTSC 22 | March 12, 2012
Presiding: Justice J.E. Richard
For the Crown: M. Johnson
For the Accused: J. Bran
The offender entered the home of his
common-law’s mother through a
window to an upstairs bedroom and got
into bed with a 12 year old girl. He was
intoxicated at the time. He was arrested
and released on an undertaking with
conditions requiring he not attend at
that residence.
The following month,
the common-law’s mother awoke at 2:30
a.m. to find the offender beside the bed
and holding the blanket off her leg. He
was intoxicated at the time of the
second incident as well. The 25 year old
offender had a lengthy criminal record.
At the time of these offences, he was on
probation as a result of a previous
sexual assault conviction.
Offender sentenced to 12 months’
imprisonment – The guilty plea and
acknowledgement of the trauma caused
to the victims acts in mitigation. One of
the main purposes of the sentencing
process is to provide for a peaceful and
safe community, and to achieve that
purpose, it is sometimes necessary to
separate an offender from society.
CRIMINAL LAW – SUMMARY
CONVICTION APPEALS –
UNREASONABLE CONVICTION –
DANGEROUS DRIVING
R v Wallbridge
2012 NWTSC 23 (CanLII) | March 27, 2012
Presiding: Justice J.E. Richard
For the Appellant: A. Pringle, QC
For the Respondent: M. Lecorre
In a case of “road rage”, a series of
events led to the victim getting out of
his vehicle and approaching the
appellant’s vehicle. There was a verbal
confrontation. As the victim then began
to walk back to his vehicle, the
appellant drove forward and bumped
the victim twice with his vehicle. The
victim was not injured. The appellant
was convicted of dangerous driving.
Appeal from conviction allowed and
acquittal entered – The trial judge
erroneously concluded that any manner
of driving a vehicle to intimidate or
scare, or to intentionally nudge or bump
a person, is dangerous operation of a
motor vehicle. The evidence was that
the appellant was driving slowly and
had his vehicle under control, and there
was little traffic on the street. This was
not considered by the trial judge.
Section 249 of the Criminal Code requires
regard to all the circumstances.
The
trial judge focused on the intentional
hitting of the victim rather than on the
manner of driving.
unreasonable.
The verdict was
CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING –
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
R v Klondike
2012 NWTSC 28 (CanLII) | March 30, 2012
Presiding: Justice K. Shaner
For the Crown: B. MacPherson, W. Miller
For the Accused: S. Fix
Sentencing for aggravated assault
following trial by jury.
The offender
had been drinking with his commonlaw
spouse and the victim. The common
-law spouse took the victim with her
into a bedroom and locked the offender
out of the room.
The offender then
entered the room and stabbed the
victim in the back with a steak knife.
The wound was serious, causing a
collapsed lung, and the victim spent a
number of days in hospital.
Offender sentenced to 18 months’
imprisonment plus two years’ probation
– The fact that the attack was
completely unexpected by the victim,
and the extent of the injury were
aggravating circumstances. This is not
a crime for which sanctions other than
imprisonment are realistically available.
LANDLORD AND TENANT LAW –
RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT –
EXTENSION OF TIME TO APPEAL
Vander Ploeg v Stewart
2012 NWTSC 30 (CanLII) | April 11, 2012
Presiding: Justice K. Shaner
For the Applicant/Appellant: S.R. McCardy
For the Respondent: self-represented
The respondent landlord filed
applications with the Rental Officer
claiming damages to the rental property
and loss of rent.
The Rental Officer
heard the matters and issued decisions
in favour of the landlord.
The Act
provides that an appeal may be brought
within 14 days of the day the party is
served with the order and decision. The
appellant did not file his appeal until 26
days after the appeal period expired.
Application to extend time denied and
appeal dismissed – The evidence does
not support the conclusion the
appellant had a bona fide intention to
appeal, nor does it provide an
explanation for the delay. There is not
an arguable case that the Rental
Officer’s decisions should be disturbed.

22 | ARCTIC OBITER
The appeal would fail even if an
extension was granted.
TERRITORIAL COURT
CRIMINAL LAW – CHARTER OF
RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS –
INVESTIGATIVE DETENTION –
RIGHT TO COUNSEL – EXCLUSION
OF EVIDENCE
R v Carter
2012 NWTTC 3 (CanLII) | March 1, 2012
Presiding: Judge G. Malakoe
For the Crown: M. Johnson
For the Accused: R. Gregory
A police officer attended a single
vehicle accident and the accused
identified himself as the driver.
Nothing about the accused’s behaviour
indicated impairment, except that his
voice was raspy and there was some
slurring in his words. The officer put
the accused in the back of the police
vehicle, indicating that he was
investigating “an impaired”. Through
questioning the officer determined the
accused had been operating a motor
vehicle and within the past three hours
had consumed alcohol. The officer then
made an ASD demand and the accused
blew a “fail”. The officer then gave a
breath demand, advised the accused he
was detained for impaired operation of
a motor vehicle, and read him his right
to counsel.
Application to exclude the breath
samples dismissed - The accused was
detained when seated in the back of the
police vehicle.
The information then
obtained was significant, and as a result
of the answers from the accused, the
officer felt he had grounds for the ASD
demand. The Crown conceded this was
a s.10(b) violation but argued the
evidence should not be excluded.
Although the police conduct was
serious, it was not deliberate.
The
officer believed he was not detaining
the accused.
The fact that the officer
communicated the right to silence to the
accused and the fact that the detention
was brief and for purposes of obtaining
grounds for the ASD demand lessened
the impact of the of the breach. Over 80
is a serious offence and it is accepted
t h a t r o a d s i d e s c r e e n i n g a n d
breathalyzers are the main tools in the
investigation and proof of these types of
offences.
The accused has not
established the admission of the
statements, and consequently the breath
tests would bring the administration of
justice into disrepute.
CRIMINAL LAW – DEFENCES – SELF-
DEFENCE
R v Eyakfwo
2012 NWTTC 4 (CanLII) | March 15, 2012
Presiding: Judge B.E. Schmaltz
For the Crown: M. Lecorre
For the Accused: J. Bran
The accused struck the victim in the face
with a crowbar, wounding him.
The
only issue at trial was the applicability
of self-defence.
The accused testified
that there had been a series of conflicts
between him and the victim that
evening.
The accused picked up a
crowbar because he was afraid the
victim might be waiting for him around
a corner.
The accused was then
carrying the crowbar as he was walking
in the dark, and when he went around a
corner he saw the victim kneeling down
with his arms extended towards the
accused.
The accused testified he
thought the victim was going to “take
me down”, “attack me”, “hurt me”, and
so he swung the crowbar at the victim,
hitting him in the jaw.
Accused convicted of aggravated
assault - While the accused was scared
of the victim at some point that evening,
and may have even been scared of the
victim at the point that he hit him with
the crowbar, the self-defence provisions
of the Criminal Code did not apply
because there was intent to cause
grievous bodily harm and the accused
could not have reasonably believed he
was going to be killed or seriously hurt.
The accused’s response was completely
disproportionate to the situation.
Maureen McGuire is an Appellate Counsel
with Alberta Justice. She is a member of the
Bar in the NWT, Ontario, and Alberta. Any
comments or questions regarding case digests
would be welcomed at her email address,
Maureen.McGuire@gov.ab.ca.
CBA-BC INVITES NORTHERN MEMBERS TO JOIN SECTIONS
The British Columbia Branch of the CBA welcomes CBA members in the Northwest Territories to
their Sections. Information on the 72 available sections, including the Women Lawyers Forum, is
available on the CBA-BC website: cba.org/bc

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 23
S.C.C. UPDATE
HERE IS A SUMMARY OF ALL APPEALS AND ALL LEAVES TO APPEAL (ONES GRANTED – SO YOU KNOW
WHAT AREAS OF LAW THE S.C.C. WILL SOON BE DEALING WITH IN CASE ANY MAY BE AN AREA OF LAW
YOU’RE LITIGATING/ADVISING/MANAGING). FOR LEAVES, I’VE SPECIFICALLY ADDED IN BOTH THE DATE
THE S.C.C. GRANTED LEAVE AND THE DATE OF THE C.A. JUDGMENT BELOW, IN CASE YOU WANT TO
TRACK AND CHECK OUT THE C.A. JUDGMENT.
APPEALS
ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW: DISCIPLINE; CHARTER &
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Doré v. Barreau du Québec
(Jan. 13, 2010) (33594)
2012 SCC 12 (CanLII) | March 22, 2012
A lawyer who wrote an intemperate
and critical letter to a judge (himself
reprimanded by the Canadian Judicial
Council) was suspended for 21 days,
and the Code of Ethics upheld as
constitutional.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: ROLE OF
TRIBUNALS V. ROLE OF COURTS;
STANDARD OF REVIEW; LANGUAGE
RIGHTS; SCHOOL FUNDING
Halifax (Regional Municipality) v.
Nova Scotia (Human Rights
Commission)
(N.S.C.A., Feb. 11, 2010, heard on Oct. 19, 2011)
(33651)
2012 SCC 10 (CanLII) | March 16, 2012
When a Human Rights Commission
appoints a board of inquiry, a reviewing
court should intervene only if there is
no reasonable basis in law or evidence
to support the decision, and their
discretionary decision should be
r e v i e w e d o n a s t a n d a r d o f
reasonableness.
CHARTER: FREEDOM OF
CONSCIENCE AND RELIGION
S.L. v. Commission scolaire des
Chênes
(Que. C.A., Feb. 24, 2010) (33678)
2012 SCC 7 (CanLII) | February 17, 2012
A mandatory Ethics and Religious
Culture course in Quebec schools is not
a breach of freedom of conscience and
religion.
CIVIL PROCEDURE: FORUM
SELECTION CLAUSES
Momentous.ca Corp. v. Canadian American
Association of Professional Baseball Ltd.
(Ont. C.A., Oct. 29, 2010) (33999)
2012 SCC 9 (CanLII) | March 15, 2012
When another forum (arbitration panel,
tribunal, other court) has exclusive
jurisdiction to deal with a claim, a
motion can be brought (here, Ontario)
to dismiss (granted, upheld on appeal).
CRIMINAL LAW: LONG-TERM
SUPERVISION ORDERS; LONG-
TERM OFFENDERS; ABORIGINAL
OFFENDERS
R. v. Ipeelee
(Ont. C.A., Dec. 15, 2009) (33650)
R. v. Ladue
(B.C.C.A., Mar. 8, 2011) (34245)
2012 SCC 13 (CanLII) | March 23, 2012
Courts must take into account an
aboriginal offender’s background for
sentencing purposes, and counsel have
a duty to bring that individualized
information forward unless expressly
waived.
CRIMINAL LAW: WARRANTLESS
WIRETAPS
R. v. Tse
(B.C.S.C., Feb. 22, 2008) (33751)
2012 SCC 16 (CanLII) | April 13, 2012
Section 184.4 of the Criminal Code was
declared unconstitutional, primarily
because of lack of accountability.
Judgment suspended for 1 year for
Parliament to act.
CONSUMER PROTECTION IN
QUEBEC: “HONEY, WE JUST WON
A VACUUM CLEANER (AND
PUNITIVE DAMAGES)”
Richard v. Time Inc.
(Que. C.A., December 10, 2009) (33554)
2012 SCC 8 (CanLII) | February 28, 2012
A mass mail-out contravened Quebec’s
p r o h i b i t e d b u s i n e s s p r a c t i c e s
legislation, resulting in $1,000
compensatory damages and $15,000
punitives.
TAX: RESIDENCY OF TRUSTS (FOR
TAX PURPOSES)
Fundy Settlement v. Canada
(Fed. C.A., Nov. 17, 2010) (34056, 34057)
2012 SCC 14 (CanLII) | April 12, 2012
A trust is resident where its real
business is carried on, which is where
the central management and control of

24 | ARCTIC OBITER
the trust actually takes place, not
(always) where the trustee lives.
LEAVES TO APPEAL
GRANTED
ABORIGINAL LAW: TREATY
RIGHTS; DUTY TO CONSULT
Sally Behn, et al. v. Moulton
Contracting Ltd., et al.
(B.C.C.A., July 6, 2011) (34404)
April 5, 2012
Is there a duty to consult, and what is
the content of that duty, with regard to
timber licences within aboriginalclaimed
land.
CIVIL PROCEDURE: REASONS FOR
JUDGMENT
Eric Victor Cojocaru, et al v. B.C.
Women's Hospital and Health Center
et al
(B.C.C.A., April 14, 2011) (34304)
April 5, 2012
To what extent can a trial judge adopt
submissions of counsel.
CRIMINAL LAW: FORFEITURE OF
OFFENCE-RELATED PROPERTY
Her Majesty the Queen v. Alphide
Manning
(Que. C.A., May 16, 2011) (34358)
February 23, 2012
In what circumstances can offencerelated
property be forfeited.
CRIMINAL LAW: HOURLY RATES
FOR AMICUS CURIAE
R. v. Criminal Lawyers Association,
et al
(Ont. C.A., April 19, 2011) (34317)
April 5, 2012
When amicus curiae is appointed by a
court, who pays, and how much.
CRIMINAL LAW: MURDER &
(ATTEMPTED) SUICIDE
Gauthier v. R.
(Que. C.A., July 26, 2011) (34444)
March 29, 2012
Is there first degree murder on the facts
of this case.
EMPLOYMENT LAW: PENSIONS
IBM Canada v. Waterman
(B.C.C.A., Aug. 2, 2011) (34472)
April 5, 2012
In a termination situation, should
pension benefits paid during the notice
period be deducted from a damages
award.
LABOUR LAW: RANDOM ALCOHOL
TESTING
Communications, Energy and
Paperworkers Union of Canada,
Local 30 v. Irving Pulp & Paper
(N.B. C.A., July 7, 2011) (34473)
March 22, 2012
Can an employer adopt a random
mandatory alcohol testing policy.
MARITIME LAW: LIMITATION
PERIODS
Marine Services International, David
Porter v. Estate of Joseph Ryan, et al
(NL. C.A., June 15, 2011) (34429)
April 5, 2012
Does a provincial limitation period
apply in a federal Marine Liability Act
proceeding.
PENSIONS IN QUEBEC
Régie des rentes du Québec v. Canada
Bread Company Ltd., et al.
(Que. C.A., Aug. 22, 2011) (34505)
March 29, 2012
Are certain clauses of a private pension
plan that authorizes an employer to
reduce pensions after closing down
lawful.
TORTS: MED MAL
Cassidy Alexis Ediger, an infant by
her Guardian Ad Litem, Carolyn
Grace Ediger v. William G. Johnston
(B.C.C.A., May 30, 2011) (34408)
February 23, 2012
Should availability of a back-up
caesarian section be confirmed before
attempting a rotational mid-level
forceps delivery.
Eugene Meehan, QC, is a Litigation Partner at
Supreme Advocacy LLP, Ottawa. His primary
area of work is with the Supreme Court of
Canada, mainly assisting other lawyers in
taking cases (both Leave to Appeal and
Appeal), and complex legal opinions. For
previous summaries, and to keep up-to-date
with all SCC appeals and leave to appeals,
contact Eugene at
emeehan@supremeadvocacy.ca.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 25
NWT LEGISLATIVE NEWS
by Kelly McLaughlin, Acting Director, Legislation Division, GNWT Justice
THE NWT LEGISLATIVE NEWS IS
NOT A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT
OF LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS.
ONLY ITEMS CONSIDERED TO BE
OF INTEREST TO THE BAR ARE
LISTED.
COST OF CREDIT DISCLOSURE
ACT
The Cost of Credit Disclosure
Regulations were registered March 19,
2012 as R-014-2012, and came into
force on April 1, 2012. The regulations
set out the information that must be
disclosed by credit grantors in
advertisements and disclosure
statements made in respect of credit
agreements to which the Cost of Credit
Disclosure Act applies. The regulations
also establish the calculations to be
used in determining the annual
percentage rate for credit agreements.
Additionally, the regulations expand
the classes of agreements that are
exempt from the application of the
Act.
SOCIAL ASSISTANCE ACT
The Social Assistance Appeals
Regulations were registered March 19,
2012 as R-016-2012, and will come
into force on July 1, 2012. The
regulations set out the process to be
followed on appeal of a decision made
under the Social Assistance Act by the
Director of Social Assistance or by a
Social Welfare Officer.
IT’S ALL ONLINE!
Find Certified Bills, Consolidations of Acts,
Regulations and Court Rules, and the
Northwest Territories Gazette at the GNWT
website:
http://www.justice.gov.nt.ca/
Legislation/SearchLeg&Reg.shtml
Good food,
great company.
On Tuesday, June 19, 2012, celebrate the warmth of the season with old
friends and new colleagues during the spring sitting of the NWT Court of
Appeal. Save the date, and watch your inbox for your invitation.
Court of Appeal
Barbeque

26 | ARCTIC OBITER
NOTICES
The Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories
Court of Appeal of the Northwest Territories
SCHEDULING NOTICE
TO MEMBERS OF THE BAR
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT THE NEXT SUPREME COURT
GENERAL CRIMINAL LIST WILL BE CALLED ON:
Friday, May 11, 2012
Video conference appearances by
persons in custody outside Yellowknife
who are not represented by counsel will
be held at 10:00 hrs
Courtroom appearances will be held at
14:00 hrs
NOTE:
at Yellowknife, NT
IN COURTROOM #5
1. All Counsel (Crown & Defence) with pending matters are to
attend the Calling of the List, either personally or by agent.
2. For those pending matters in which the Accused person has
elected trial by Judge and Jury, counsel (both Crown &
Defence) are to advise the presiding Judge at the time of, or
prior to, the Calling of the List whether the matter will indeed
be proceeding as a contested Jury Trial and, if so, the
estimated duration of the Jury Trial.
3. For those with Summary Conviction Appeals, please be
reminded of Rule 117 of the Criminal Rules of the NWT.
NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE BAR
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT THE LIST OF CASES PENDING AND THE
GENERAL APPEAL LIST WILL BE CALLED BY A JUDGE IN CHAMBERS ON
Friday, May 11, 2012
Video conference appearances by
persons in custody outside Yellowknife
who are not represented by counsel will
be held at 10:00 hrs
Courtroom appearances will be held at
15:00 hrs
at Yellowknife NT
IN COURTROOM #5
for the Court of Appeal Assize commencing
June 19, 2012
COUNSEL ARE REMINDED OF THE FOLLOWING NEW FILING
DEADLINES FOR APPEALS FILED AFTER MARCH 1, 2006:
CIVIL APPEALS and CRIMINAL APPEALS
a) Appeal books must be filed not later than 12 weeks from
the date on which the notice of appeal was filed.
b) Appellant’s Factums must be filed within 60 days of filing
of the appeal book or within 7 months of the notice of
appeal whichever date is earliest.
c) Respondent’s factum must be filed within 30 days of
being served the appellant’s factum.
d) Only those appeals that have been perfected as at May
11, 2012 will be set for hearing at the June 19, 2012
assize.

MARCH/APRIL 2012 | 27
RESOURCES
The Legal Profession
Assistance Conference
(LPAC) of the Canadian Bar Assocation is
dedicated to helping lawyers, judges, law
students and their families with personal,
emotional, health and lifestyle issues
through a network of Lawyer Assistance
Programs, a national 24-hour helpline and
Provincial Programs. If you need
assistance, please call the helpline or visit
their website.
1-800-667-5722
www.lpac.ca
The Law Society of the
NWT and the CBA-NT
Branch have partnered
with Human Solutions to offer members
free, private and confidential professional
counseling and consultation for the
resolution of personal issues or work
related difficulties.
This service is available 24 hours a day, 7
days a week. Call any time.
1-800-663-1142
Mentor Program
Members from Northwest Territories and Nunavut are invited to call the office of the Alberta
Practice Advisor and ask for the Mentor Program. Please be advised that not all of the mentors
may be totally familiar with NT statutes and practice. There is no cost. CALL 1-888-272-8839
Practice Advisors
The Practice Advisors from the
Law Society of Alberta are
available to discuss legal, ethical and
practice concerns, and personal matters
such as stress and addiction. Members are
invited to contact the Practice Advisors at
any time:
Ross McLeod (Edmonton)
Tel:
780-412-2301 or
1-800-661-2135
Fax: 780-424-1620
ross.mcleod@lawsocietyalberta.com
Nancy Carruthers (Calgary)
Tel:
403-229-4714 or
1-866-440-4640
Fax: 403-228-1728
nancy.carruthers@lawsocietyalberta.com
THE LIGHTER SIDE
Passing Judgement
McKenzie v. Scotia Lumber Co.
(1913), 11 D.L.R. 729 (N.S.S.C.)
"The case must have occurred a
thousand times, but the reason why
counsel, who argued the appeal, were
unable to cite any authority directly
bearing upon the question, is probably
that, until this case arose, there never
was anybody wrong-headed enough to
make such an accident the subject of an
action at law."
National Trust Co. v. Furbacher
(1994) O.J. No. 2385
“Pleadings are supposed to be a road
map – but not of all the roads in the
world – but only how to get from Point
A to Point B. Was this a road map? I
think not, unless it be by Pablo
Picasso”
Re Laramie
(2001), 25 C.B.R. (4th) 268:
“This dispute is like the alien life form
in the movie ‘The Blob’. It has a life of
its own and it just keeps growing. Why
that should be so is a puzzle to me.”
Oil & Gas Futures, Inc. of Tex. v.
Andrus
610 F.2d 287, 287–88 (5th Cir. 1980)
“In this appeal we are asked to
determine whether ‘.82’ is the
equivalent of ‘82%.’ Having
successfully completed grammar
school, we are able to answer the
question in the affirmative. “
Labbee v. Peters
(1997), 201 A.R. 241, aff'd 1999 ABCA 246
“One person in the Grande Prairie
court room did not know how a grain
truck unloads grain. Unfortunately for
the defence case, that person was its
expert accident reconstruction
witness.”
With excerpts from Ted Tjaden’s “Judicial
Humour” on slaw.ca.

CBA Canadian Legal Conference and Marketplace (CLC)
CBA, CCCA and Judges’ Day Programs
August 12 to 14, 2012 | Vancouver
Connect on a National Level
We understand that networking with peers in all
areas of practice is a primary benefit of attending
the CLC.
The CBA Canadian Legal Conference and Marketplace is
the only national gathering of Canada’s legal community.
www.cba.org/Vancouver2012
RSVP & JOIN US!
/company/canadian-bar-association
FOLLOW US!
@CBA_News, #clcvancouver
LIKE US!
/CanadianBarAssociation