Cory J.
Cory J. ‑‑ The motion brought by the respondent Crown to strike out paragraphs 3 to 24 of the appellant’s factum must be granted since they do not deal with the legal issues raised in the dissent of Berger J.A. As a result there is no appeal before us arising from the issue of law raised in the dissent.
The appellant (respondent in the motion) now seeks leave to appeal on the matters that were raised in the factum in paragraphs 3 to 24. However, the appellant had been informed in the order made by Justice L’Heureux‑Dubé that leave would be required to present that argument and leave was not sought.
At this late stage there is nothing further that the Court can do and the appeal is therefore dismissed.