Appellate Practice

Counsel from Hunter Litigation Chambers appear regularly in the British Columbia Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada and occasionally in the Federal Court of Appeal. Our senior lawyers are experienced appellate counsel and can provide specialized appellate services to lawyers whose practice is primarily at the trial level.

Some of the recent appellate cases our counsel have handled include:

College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia v Ezzati, 2019 BCCA 306, 28 BCLR (6th) 92: In a leading case regarding the scope of the practice of medicine in the province, our counsel obtained a ruling from the Court of Appeal that the respondent’s having explained the risks and benefits of botulinum toxin (Botox) and dermal filler injections for the purposes of obtaining clients’ informed consent amounted to the practice of medicine. Given that the respondent was subject to an interim injunction not to practice medicine, she was found in contempt of court in this regard.

Li v Rao, 2019 BCCA 264, 26 BCLR (6th) 219: In a leading authority on “anti-arbitration” injunctions in Canada’s common law courts, our lawyers were successful in defending a Supreme Court order enjoining the defendant in this family law case from proceeding with an arbitration he commenced before the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), until the BC courts ruled on various applications.

Aulakh v Nahal, 2019 BCCA 57, 22 BCLR (6th) 71: Acted for the appellant in a challenge to the trial judge’s assessment of “uniqueness” for the purposes of analyzing the suitability of specific performance as a remedy for breach of a contract of purchase and sale of residential real estate.

Democracy Watch v British Columbia (Conflict of Interest Commissioner), 2017 BCCA 366: Acted for the respondent Conflict of Interest Commissioner in proceedings seeking to challenge his opinion concerning certain activities of the then-Premier. The proceedings were dismissed with no impact on the Commissioner’s opinion.

R. v. Dickey, 2016 BCCA 177:  We represented an intervener, Pivot Legal Society, on an appeal relating to the constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentence provisions.

Goodwin v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2015 SCC 46: Our counsel represented the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association in this appeal concerning the constitutionality of the province's 2010 Automatic Roadside Prohibition scheme targeting impaired drivers.

Ogden v. C.I.B.C., 2015 BCCA 175: Our counsel successfully appealed a trial judgment finding that the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce had wrongfully terminated the employment of a financial advisor at the bank.

M.M. v. United States of America, 2015 SCC 62: Counsel from the firm represented the intervener, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, in this extradition case involving the application of the principle of double criminality.

Harrison v. Law Society of British Columbia, 2015 BCCA 258: Our counsel succeeded on an application to strike an appeal as being a collateral attack of a judgment rendered in separate proceedings, amounting to an abuse of process.

Musqueam Indian Band Board of Review v. Musqueam Indian Band, 2015 BCCA 158: We represented the Shaughnessy Golf Club in successfully opposing an appeal by the Musqueam Band of a trial decision concerning the property tax assessment principles applicable to the Club.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Federation of Law Societies of Canada, 2015 SCC 7: We represented the Federation of Law Societies of Canada in this important appeal that established that the lawyer's duty of commitment to the client's cause was a principle of fundamental justice in Canadian constitutional law. The Court struck down provisions of Canada's anti-money laundering legislation insofar as they imposed record-keeping obligations on lawyers concerning their clients' activities.

Reference re Senate Reform, 2014 SCC 32: Counsel from the firm was appointed amicus curiae to present independent submissions to the Supreme Court of Canada in this reference on Senate reform.

Sivia v. British Columbia (Superintendant of Motor Vehicles), 2014 BCCA 79: We represented the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association on an appeal relating to constitutionality of automatic roadside driving prohibitions.

John Doe v. Ontario (Finance), 2014 SCC 36: We represented the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association in this appeal concerning the "advice or recommendations of a public servant" exception to disclosure.

Henry v. Canada (AG), 2014 BCCA 30: Our counsel appeared for several individuals in this appeal challenging the constitutionality of the federal voter identification and residence rules.

Sun‑Rype Products Ltd. v. Archer Daniels Midland Company, 2013 SCC 58:  We represented Cargill in this commercial appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and successfully opposed certification of a class action against Cargill by indirect purchasers of the product.

Canadian Forest Products Ltd. v. Sam, 2013 BCCA 58: Our counsel successfully appealed an injunction granted on behalf of a First Nation against Canadian Forest Products based on a dispute over the validity of Canfor's cutting permit.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72: We intervened in this important Charter case on behalf of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association in which section 7 of the Charter was invoked in relation to Canada's prostitution laws.

Wilson v. Williams, 2013 BCCA 471: We acted on this appeal on the issue of whether defamatory statements were published on occasions of absolute privilege.

Johnson v. Jessel, 2012 BCCA 393: Our counsel represented a mother in this appeal from orders made under the Hague Convention following the removal of children from British Columbia to Germany.

Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. Alberta Teachers’ Association, 2011 SCC 61, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 654: We intervened in this leading administrative law case concerning standard of review, failure to comply with statutory time limits, and raising new issues on judicial review.

R. v. Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, 2011 SCC 42, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 45: Our counsel represented Imperial Tobacco in this decision dealing with the circumstances when the Federal Government may be joined as a third party in provincial cost-recovery litigation.

R. v. Cunningham, 2010 SCC 10, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 331: We intervened on behalf of the Law Society of Yukon in a case concerning the role of the Court when counsel seeks to withdraw from representation of a client.

R. v. Basi, 2009 SCC 52, [2009] 3 S.C.R. 389: Our counsel successfully appealed to restore the protection of informer privilege.

In addition to conducting a wide range of cases as appellate counsel, our lawyers have been active in writing and teaching on appellate practice. Our counsel are regular participants at Continuing Legal Education programs on appellate advocacy and have written extensively on oral and written appellate practice.