The session will be the SCC’s last in its current location before it moves for a historic renovation
The Supreme Court of Canada will hear 14 appeals during its spring session, 10 of which are criminal cases. The final hearing of the season, on May 22nd, will be the last held in the high court’s current location before it temporarily moves proceedings down the block to 344 Wellington Street in Ottawa while the courthouse undergoes a decade-long renovation.
Before that hearing, Chief Justice Richard Wagner will likely make opening remarks for the occasion. Those remarks will be broadcast. However, the hearing itself in Jordan Bilinski v. His Majesty the King is subject to a publication ban and will be broadcast.
The high court will hear arguments in His Majesty the King in Right of Canada v. Damodar Arapakota on April 16. The case involves Arapakota, the founder of software development company Imex. According to the Crown’s allegations, Arapakota bribed an official with the government of Botswana by paying for his family vacation in Orlando, Florida. In exchange, he received letters confirming that the Botswana government would award a contract to Imex.
At trial, Arapakota was acquitted of bribing a foreign public official in violation of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. The trial court found that while he conferred a material benefit on the Botswana official, that benefit did not motivate the letters he later provided. An Ontario Court of Appeal majority dismissed the Crown’s appeal of the acquittal, finding that while the trial court had made a legal error, that error had no impact on its ruling.
The SCC will consider whether the OCA erred in its interpretation of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, and whether the OCA erred in finding that the trial court’s legal error did not affect its ruling.
One of the season’s most highly-watched cases, St. John's International Airport Authority v. Michel Thibodeau, will be heard on April 20. The case features six intervenors.
The events leading up to the case date back to 2018, when Thibodeau filed six complaints with the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada against St. John’s International Airport Authority, alleging the authority had breached the Official Languages Act. Thibodeau claimed that the authority’s social media and press releases were entirely in English; that the French version of its website was of lower quality than the English version; that certain documents, including annual reports, were only available in English; and that within the airport, certain ATM signs were only in English.
The commissioner agreed that the authority had breached the OLA, which requires federal institutions to give equal status to French and English. Thibodeau sought a court declaration that the authority had violated the OLA. The Federal Court declared a breach and awarded Thibodeau $5,000 in damages. A majority of the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the authority’s appeal.
This is not the first time Thibodeau, who is known as a language activist, has participated in an appeal before the high court. In 2014, the SCC issued its decision in Michel Thibodeau, et al. v. Air Canada, et al., which addressed damages after all parties agreed that Air Canada had violated the Thibodeau’s and his partner’s language rights.
On April 22, the high court will consider whether Quebec’s Bill 59 infringes s. 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Procureur général du Québec c. Xavier-Antoine Lalande, et al.. The law effectively forces Quebec’s electoral commission to pause reviews of the province’s electoral map until after its next general election in October. Quebec lawmakers introduced the bill after discovering that a proposed redistricting of the province’s ridings would result in two ridings disappearing. It would also create two new ridings.
In December, the Quebec Court of Appeal ruled that Bill 59 was unconstitutional and of no force or effect. According to the appellate court, the law would result in the votes of Estrie–Centre-du-Québec and Laurentides–Lanaudière, the communities represented by the new proposed ridings, being diluted relative to other ridings.
The high court will consider whether the law violates s. 3, which guarantees the right to vote. If so, the court will then consider whether that breach is justified by s. 1 of the Charter, which allows limitations on Charter rights if those limits can be reasonably justified. There are five intervenors to date.
On May 21 and May 22, the SCC will hear arguments in two cases that raise questions about how mens rea for sexual assault can be established: Bevin Kerry Degale v. His Majesty the King and Jordan Bilinski v. His Majesty the King.
Degale currently has six intervenors. At trial, Degale was acquitted of aggravated sexual assault against his then-girlfriend, who did not cooperate with the prosecution or testify at trial. The trial court concluded that the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Degale knew about the complainant’s lack of consent. However, the OCA unanimously allowed the Crown’s appeal, ruling that the evidence that allowed the trial court to establish actus reus also established his mens rea.
In Bilinksi, the SCC will consider whether a jury must be given certain instructions when a defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent is unavailable.
Both cases are subject to a publication ban.
