Law360 Canada ( September 4, 2024, 10:53 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellants from a judgment dismissing the appellants' constitutional challenge and application for disclosure. The British Columbia Securities Commission (the "Commission") issued an investigation order. The investigator appointed by the Commission to conduct the investigation sought information from the appellants about the trading activities of others and issued summons to each of them. The appellants were not the subjects of the investigation order nor did the Commission alleged that they had contravened the Securities Act (Act). Both appellants refused to attend the interview as compelled by the summonses. Pursuant to s. 144(2) of the Act, the Commission petitioned the Supreme Court of British Columbia for an order requiring the appellants to comply with the summonses under the threat of committing them in contempt. The appellants brought two applications. The first, a challenge to the constitutionality of s. 144(2) of the Act and second, an application for disclosure. The chambers judge dismissed both applications. The appellants submitted the chambers judge made a number of errors in her assessment of their constitutional challenge. They also argued that s. 144(2) of the Act should be declared inoperative to the extent it conflicted with s. 9 of the Criminal Code (Code) and that the chambers judge erred in dismissing their application for disclosure. The respondents asserted that the chambers judge was correct when she dismissed the applications....