Effective immediately and until further notice, electronic filing (e-filing) for Receiver/Manager applications, applications filed under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), and plans of arrangement under The Corporations Act is not available due to technical difficulties. Documents must be submitted in hard copy format with the Court of King’s Bench Registry.
A subsequent notice will be issued advising when e-filing may resume.
“Amendments to Rule 37.2 of the Court of Appeal Rules came into force on October 31, 2022. The use of audio or videoconference technology will become a regular procedure for chambers hearings, while remaining an extraordinary procedure for appeals before a panel.
Requests to Appear Remotely: Parties will no longer be required to bring a motion to appear by audio or videoconference. In all instances, a party should make a written request to the registrar, who maintains discretion to waive or adjust the prescribed timelines. Parties must provide notice of a request to appear remotely to every other party directly affected by the appeal, motion or application.
For Chambers: A request is to be filed with the party’s initiating or responding materials and no later than two (2) business days prior to the hearing. Permission will be granted to the party to appear by their preferred mode, unless the registrar determines that remote participation is not appropriate in the circumstances.
For Appeals: A request is to be filed no later than ten (10) business days prior to the hearing of the appeal and should set out the circumstances giving rise to the request for a remote hearing. Parties may wish to address some or all instances stated in the practice direction. The court or a judge may then permit a party to participate by audioconference or videoconference if they determine there are special circumstances that make remote participation appropriate.
Videoconference Procedure: In preparation for their appearance, parties should refer to the Videoconference Hearing Procedure for Lawyers and Self-Represented Parties. It is recommended that parties conduct a videoconference test call to ensure a stable connection and functioning microphone and video.”
The full notice regarding this update can be found here.
” As part of the Court of King’s Bench of Manitoba’s continuing commitment to principles of access to justice, which include reducing regional barriers to accessing the courts, the Court will now offer to Manitoba counsel practicing outside the City of Winnipeg, the option of appearing by telephone on the Civil Uncontested List in the Winnipeg Judicial Centre.”
Conditions and more information are available in the full notice.
On October 1, 2022, amendments to King’s Bench Rules 74 and 75, regarding Probate, come into effect. The primary objective of the new rules is to eliminate jargon and use plain language to make the rules easier to understand.
Along with new rules, come new forms. There will be a little leeway to allow the profession to get used to the new forms, but members could face the risk of having their documents rejected for lack of compliance.
Make sure you and your team are using the correct forms.
“Where counsel to an accused in a criminal case is moving to withdraw as counsel, the motion to withdraw is returnable before the pre-trial conference judge (and is not returnable on the Criminal Motions and Bails List).
To obtain a date before the pre-trial conference judge, counsel may contact the trial coordinator by email. This approach permits the pre-trial conference judge (who has background regarding the case) to canvass with counsel and the accused how to mitigate the effect a potential withdrawal by counsel may have on the previously scheduled trial which is otherwise required to promptly proceed forward absent exceptional circumstances. To similarly minimize the impact of a withdrawal by counsel (either on the trial or the accused’s desire to be represented by available counsel at trial), a motion to withdraw as counsel should be brought as soon as possible. In those situations where a motion to withdraw is filed within days of the scheduled trial date, it may be that the motion is heard by the trial judge.”
“Further to the Notice issued on June 9, 2022 concerning the return to in-person proceedings effective September 6, 2022, the Masters have had some time to consider the issue of attendance of children aged 12 and over at the Masters’ Child Protection Dockets.”
“… [G]iven the very specific legislative requirement pursuant to section 33(2) of The Child and Family Services Act, C.C.S.M. c. C80, impacted children aged 12 and over need to be served, and brought to court to address their rights. This return to pre-pandemic practice will be effective immediately.”
The full notice regarding this update can be found here.
A new King means a lot of change for the legal community. The names and titles of a monarch are ingrained in the statutes of Manitoba since it was established. They have been adapted as needed, starting with the Court of King’s Bench of Manitoba.
The History of the Court of Queen’s Bench act.
There are probably only a few people around today that remember when it used to be called the King’s Bench, but the court has seen its share of name changes in its history. When the courts were first established in Manitoba, Queen Victoria was sovereign.
Originally, in 1871, the court was actually to be the called “The Supreme Court”:
But that didn’t last long. The very next year the court was changed to reflect the role of the Queen, and already there were provisions should a King ascended to the throne.
The 1880 consolidation Chapter 31 stayed that way –
until the reign of Edward VII substituted the new title in 1901.
The 1902 consolidation would add some clarification to ongoing cases still in the King’s, or Queen’s, name.
And with the rise of Queen Elizabeth II in 1952 the title would change again.
While it’s still called “The Queen’s Bench Act” (C.C.S.M. c. C280) today, the provision for naming remains. Maybe some extra paperwork could have been saved in the last 150 years had they just stuck with “Supreme Court.”
Queen’s Counsel to King’s Counsel
Another piece of legislation to be updated involves the practice of appointing Queen’s Counsel. The practice was enacted in Manitoba in 1909 with King Edward.
The practice would continue with TheLaw society Act, 1954 RSM Ch. 139.
The Manitoba Law Library would like to acknowledge with gratitude that we are situated on Treaty One Territory, the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe, Cree and Dakota peoples, and the homeland of the Métis Nation.
Printing and Photocopying
If you need to use the library’s printing and photocopying services you will need to create an account. See us at the front desk for assistance.