786 THE ADVOCATE
VOL. 79 PART 5 SEPTEMBER 2021
office. Benton J. Mischuk swaps Sheffman & Company for MKS Immigration
Marvin R.V. Storrow, Q.C., and Andrew J. Petter, Q.C., both of Vancouver,
were recently appointed as members of the Order of British Columbia. Well
done, lads! A celebration is in order.
Justice Charney of the Ontario Superior Court remarked on being the
“tenth Superior Court judge to address the legal disputes” that had arisen
from a real estate transaction six years earlier, and noted that “in reviewing
the material presented by counsel, I could not help but be reminded of the
classic Star Trek episode ‘Let That Be Your Last Battlefield’ Season 3,
Episode 15, in which the last two survivors of a war-torn planet pursue each
other across the universe, each committed to destroying the other long after
their planet has become extinct”: 1806700 Ontario Inc. v. Khan, 2018 ONSC
6364 at para. 6.
July 2021 saw the appointment of three new Provincial Court judges: Sheila
Archer, Derek Mah and Dannielle Dunn. In addition, two new judicial justices
were appointed: Leslie-Anne Wall and Hugh S. McCall.
The Honourable Robert J. Sewell, Q.C., has retired from the B.C. Supreme
Court effective August 13, 2021. He is joining Cornish Margolis Boyd Mediation
and Arbitration September 15, 2021, as arbitrator.
In news from next door, Greg P. Shannon, Q.C., formerly at Gowlings in
Calgary and Vancouver, was appointed as a judge of the Provincial Court of
Alberta (Civil Division – Calgary) on July 30, 2021.
In Vidéotron ltée c. Bell ExpressVu, l.p., 2012 QCCS 3492, the court noted that
“history changed on October 4, 1957, when the Soviet Union successfully
launched Sputnik I, the world’s first artificial satellite. It marked the start of
the space age and a scientific and technological battle of epic proportions
between the two world titans.”
Sputnik featured in Krieger v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 390 Pa. 496, a
1957 decision of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, walking
properly along the side of a railway track, had been “struck by the overhang
of a train which came up from behind, that is, the train came north on the
southbound track”. The defendant railroad company argued that the plaintiff
was contributory negligent “because she made no effort to ascertain whether