December 5, 2011 - Nova Scotia Barristers' Society

PRACTICE – Costs – party and party costs MacDonald v. Holland's Carriers Ltd., Hfx. No. 263296, Pickup, J.,November 25, 2011. 2011 NSSC 436; S638/26December 5, 2011PRACTICE – Costs – set according to previous Civil Procedure Rules Cherubini Metal Works Ltd. v. Nova Scotia(Attorney General), Hfx. No. 184701, Duncan, J., November 21, 2011. 2011 NSSC 429; S638/29REAL PROPERTY – Quieting of title – request for certificate of title to water lot adjoining the property in originalapplication, costs Creighton v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General), Bwt. No. 220834, Pickup, J., November 25, 2011. 2011NSSC 437; S638/27SUPREME COURT of CANADA — recent decisionsLibrary & Information Services - Keeping you informedThe following decisions were released on the Supreme Court of Canada Judgments website since the last InForum. Thesubject headings and summaries have been prepared by the Supreme Court of Canada.December 2, 2011Nor‐Man Regional Health Authority Inc. v. Manitoba Association of Health Care ProfessionalsNeutral citation: 2011 SCC 59 (CanLII)File No.: 33795.2011: October 20; 2011: December 2Present: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ.ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR MANITOBALabour Relations — Grievances — Arbitral award — Standard of review — Arbitrator imposing estoppel on union’s claimfor redress under collective agreement — Whether arbitral award applying common law or equitable remedy is reviewableon standard of reasonableness or correctness.P contended that she was entitled, upon 20 years of employment, to a bonus week of vacation pursuant to the terms ofthe collective agreement between Nor‐Man and P’s Union. Her request was denied by Nor‐Man. The arbitrator decidedthat the employer’s practice of excluding casual service in calculating vacation benefits breached the terms of thecollective agreement. However, the Union was barred by its long‐standing acquiescence from grieving the employer’sapplication of the disputed provisions of the collective agreement. The arbitrator held that the Union was estopped fromasserting its strict rights under the disputed provisions of the collective agreement until the expiry of the agreement. TheUnion’s application for judicial review was dismissed on the basis that the arbitrator’s award was reasonable. The Court ofAppeal held that correctness was the governing standard of review and it set aside the estoppel imposed by the arbitrator.Held: The appeal should be allowed.November 30, 2011R. v. Bouchard‐LebrunNeutral citation: 2011 SCC 58 (CanLII)File No.: 33687.2011: May 16; 2011: November 30.Present: McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ.InForum is an electronic newsletter published approximately twice a month. To receive a free subscription, please contact the Society at info@nsbs.org.16 < Back to “What’s New”