# 1984 reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada

The list below consists of the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 1984. This list, however, does not include decisions on motions.

## Reasons

| Delivered the Court's reason | Joined the Court's reason | Filed a concurrence | Joined a concurrence |
| Filed a dissent | Joined a dissent | Filed a concurrence/dissent | Joined a concurrence/dissent |
| Did not participate in the judgment | Did not participate in the final disposition of the judgment | Not a member of the Court at the time of hearing or delivering |
| Decisions that do not note a Justice delivering the Court's reason are per coram. Multiple concurrences and dissents within a case are numbered, with joining votes numbered accordingly. Justices occasionally join multiple reasons in a single case; each vote is subdivided accordingly. Multiple unnumbered reasons are jointly written or delivered. Decisions that are given orally from the bench are denoted by a "V"; per coram decisions delivered orally from the bench only note a "V" on the most senior justice on the panel. An asterisk ( * ) in the Court's opinion denotes that it was only a majority in part or a plurality. ||||
| Case name | Argued | Decided | Laskin | Dickson | Ritchie | Beetz | Estey | McIntyre | Chouinard | Lamer | Wilson | Le Dain |
| Beaudoin-Daigneault v Richard, 1984 CanLII 15, [1984] 1 SCR 2 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Desgagné v Fabrique de la paroisse St-Philippe d'Arvida, 1984 CanLII 129, [1984] 1 SCR 19 | 17 March 1982 | 2 February 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| R v Isaac, 1984 CanLII 130, [1984] 1 SCR 74 | 19 October 1983 | 2 February 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Telecommunications Workers' Union v. British Columbia Ferry Corporation, 1984 CanLII 131, [1984] 1 SCR 83 | 13 February 1984 | 13 February 1984 | | | V | | | | | | | |
| McKibbon v R, 1984 CanLII 67, [1984] 1 SCR 131 | 18 May 1983 | 8 March 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Reference re Newfoundland Continental Shelf, 1984 CanLII 132, [1984] 1 SCR 86 | 22–24 February 1983 (1983-02-22 – 1983-02-24) | 8 March 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Droste v R, 1984 CanLII 68, [1984] 1 SCR 208 | 2 November 1983 | 2 April 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| The Queen v. Ancio, 1984 CanLII 69, [1984] 1 SCR 225 | 8 November 1983 | 2 April 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Bibeault v McCaffrey, 1984 CanLII 133, [1984] 1 SCR 176 | 1 November 1983 | 2 April 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Brown v Baugh et al, 1984 CanLII 134, [1984] 1 SCR 192 | 2 February 1984 | 2 April 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| National Bank of Canada v. Retail Clerks' International Union et al, 1984 CanLII 2, [1984] 1 SCR 269 | 30 November 1984 | 3 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Law Society of Upper Canada v Skapinker, 1984 CanLII 3, [1984] 1 SCR 357 | 23–24 February 1984 (1984-02-23 – 1984-02-24) | 3 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Reference re Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act, 1984 CanLII 17, [1984] 1 SCR 297 | 28 September – 1 October 1982 (1982-09-28 – 1982-10-01) | 3 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| R v Garlow, 1984 CanLII 71, [1984] 1 SCR 386 | 3 May 1984 | 3 May 1984 | | | V | | | | | | | |
| Case name | Argued | Decided | Laskin | Dickson | Ritchie | Beetz | Estey | McIntyre | Chouinard | Lamer | Wilson | Le Dain |
| Chiasson v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 136, [1984] 1 SCR 266 | 13 March 1984 | 3 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Hartel Holdings Co Ltd v City of Calgary, CanLII , [1984] 1 SCR 337 | 28–29 September 1983 (1983-09-28 – 1983-09-29) | 3 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Farr v Farr, 1984 CanLII 2754, [1984] 1 SCR 252 | 29–30 November 1983 (1983-11-29 – 1983-11-30) | 3 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kane v R, CanLII , [1984] 1 SCR 387 | 14 May 1984 | 14 May 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| Reference re: Ownership of the Bed of the Strait of Georgia and Related Areas, 1984 CanLII 138, [1984] 1 SCR 388 | 26–28 October 1982 (1982-10-26 – 1982-10-28) | 17 May 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Canadian Merchant Service Guild v Gagnon et al, 1984 CanLII 18, [1984] 1 SCR 509 | 13 March 1984 | 7 June 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Stubart Investments Ltd v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 20, [1984] 1 SCR 536 | 23–24 November 1983 (1983-11-23 – 1983-11-24) | 7 June 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Langlois v Ministère de la Justice du Québec, 1984 CanLII 139, [1984] 1 SCR 472 | 14 March 1984 | 7 June 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| R v Wis Development Corporation Ltd et al, 1984 CanLII 140, [1984] 1 SCR 485 | 13 December 1983 | 7 June 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Smith v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 141, [1984] 1 SCR 582 | 7 June 1984 | 7 June 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| James Richardson & Sons v M.N.R., 1984 CanLII 1, [1984] 1 SCR 614 | 11 October 1983 | 21 June 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Consumers Distributing Co v Seiko, 1984 CanLII 73, [1984] 1 SCR 583 | 23 November 1983 | 21 June 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kamloops v Nielsen, 1984 CanLII 21, [1984] 2 SCR 2 | 22 November 1982 | 26 July 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Skogman v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 22, [1984] 2 SCR 93 | 22 November 1982 | 26 July 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| AG (Que) v. Quebec Protestant School Boards, 1984 CanLII 32, [1984] 2 SCR 66 | 21–22 February 1984 (1984-02-21 – 1984-02-22) | 26 July 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Case name | Argued | Decided | Laskin | Dickson | Ritchie | Beetz | Estey | McIntyre | Chouinard | Lamer | Wilson | Le Dain |
| Khan v R, 1984 CanLII 74, [1984] 2 SCR 62 | 19 June 1984 | 26 July 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Gould v Attorney General of Canada, 1984 CanLII 142, [1984] 2 SCR 124 | 4 September 1984 | 4 September 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| Hunter et al v Southam Inc, 1984 CanLII 33, [1984] 2 SCR 145 | 22 November 1983 | 17 September 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Royal Bank of Canada v First Pioneer Investments, 1984 CanLII 75, [1984] 2 SCR 125 | 9–10 November 1983 (1983-11-09 – 1983-11-10) | 17 September 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Maroukis v Maroukis, 1984 CanLII 76, [1984] 2 SCR 137 | 5 May 1984 | 17 September 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Ogg-Moss v R, 1984 CanLII 77, [1984] 2 SCR 173 | 3 November 1983 | 17 September 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Nixon v R, 1984 CanLII 78, [1984] 2 SCR 197 | 3 November 1983 | 17 September 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Phoenix Assurance v Bird Construction, 1984 CanLII 79, [1984] 2 SCR 199 | 15 June 1983 | 17 September 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Perka v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 23, [1984] 2 SCR 232 | 31 January – 1 February 1984 (1984-01-31 – 1984-02-01) | 11 October 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Ken Gordon Excavating v Edstan Construction, 1984 CanLII 80, [1984] 2 SCR 280 | 16–17 May 1984 (1984-05-16 – 1984-05-17) | 11 October 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Miller v Miller, 1984 CanLII 81, [1984] 2 SCR 310 | 3 October 1984 | 11 October 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Wildman v R, 1984 CanLII 82, [1984] 2 SCR 311 | 2 May 1984 | 11 October 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| R v Brese, CanLII , [1984] 2 SCR 333 | 31 October 1984 | 31 October 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| Guerin v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 25, [1984] 2 SCR 335 | 13–14 June 1983 (1983-06-13 – 1983-06-14) | 1 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Reilly v. R, 1984 CanLII 83, [1984] 2 SCR 396 | 2 November 1983 | 1 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Case name | Argued | Decided | Laskin | Dickson | Ritchie | Beetz | Estey | McIntyre | Chouinard | Lamer | Wilson | Le Dain |
| Osborne v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 119, [1984] 2 SCR 406 | 1 November 1984 | 1 November 1984 | | | | | V | | | | | |
| Syndicat des employés de production du Québec v CLRB, 1984 CanLII 26, [1984] 2 SCR 412 | 1–2 February 1983 (1983-02-01 – 1983-02-02) | 22 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Blanchard v Control Data Canada Ltd, 1984 CanLII 27, [1984] 2 SCR 476 | 15 March 1984 | 22 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Cardinal v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 112, [1984] 2 SCR 523 | 22 November 1984 | 22 November 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| Radulesco v Canadian Human Rights Commission, 1984 CanLII 120, [1984] 2 SCR 407 | 23 October 1984 | 22 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| British Columbia Development Corporation v Friedmann (Ombudsman), 1984 CanLII 121, [1984] 2 SCR 447 | 30 January 1984 | 22 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Attorney General of Quebec v Udeco Inc et al, 1984 CanLII 122, [1984] 2 SCR 502 | 23–24 May 1984 (1984-05-23 – 1984-05-24) | 22 November 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| R v Sophonow, 1984 CanLII 124, [1984] 2 SCR 524 | 10 December 1984 | 10 December 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| Goldwax v Montréal (City of), 1984 CanLII 125, [1984] 2 SCR 525 | 12 December 1984 | 12 December 1984 | | V | | | | | | | | |
| Nadeau v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 28, [1984] 2 SCR 570 | 21 November 1984 | 13 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Abbas v R, 1984 CanLII 84, [1984] 2 SCR 526 | 5 June 1984 | 13 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Attorney General (Ontario) v Fatehi, 1984 CanLII 85, [1984] 2 SCR 536 | 22 June 1984 | 13 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Duhamel v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 126, [1984] 2 SCR 555 | 2 February 1984 | 13 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Minister of Employment and Immigration et al v Jiminez-Perez et al, 1984 CanLII 127, [1984] 2 SCR 565 | 21–22 November 1984 (1984-11-21 – 1984-11-22) | 13 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| AG (Que) v Greater Hull School Board, 1984 CanLII 29, [1984] 2 SCR 575 | 20–21 June 1984 (1984-06-20 – 1984-06-21) | 20 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Case name | Argued | Decided | Laskin | Dickson | Ritchie | Beetz | Estey | McIntyre | Chouinard | Lamer | Wilson | Le Dain |
| Lyons v The Queen, 1984 CanLII 30, [1984] 2 SCR 633 | 23 June 1984 | 20 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Wiretap Reference, 1984 CanLII 31, [1984] 2 SCR 697 | 26–27 March 1984 (1984-03-26 – 1984-03-27) | 20 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Caldwell et al v Stuart et al, 1984 CanLII 128, [1984] 2 SCR 603 | 15–16 February 1984 (1984-02-15 – 1984-02-16) | 20 December 1984 | | | | | | | | | | |