|
B petitioned for a stay to restrain an involuntary transfer of B from British Columbia to an institution in Quebec. The issue was whether or not provincial superior courts or courts of appeal have any habeas corpus jurisdiction in the matter in anticipation of a transfer as opposed to the situation where the transfer has been executed. MacKenzie J.A. asserted that Hickey v. Kent Institution, [1999] B.C.J. No.2778 (B.C.S.C.) was the decision on point. In that case, Loo J. held that there is no anticipatory jurisdiction in habeas corpus in the provincial superior courts. Unless and until Hickey is overturned (leave to appeal having been granted) it remains the law.
|
TOP