On the investigations side, the six that were remaining were opened sometime between 2005 and 2007. One of the reasons for the delay with the investigation, as you may be aware, was that there was a court case filed on the four that we did table with Parliament. When we received the results of the decision from the court in March 2008, the decision of the judge actually questioned the registrar's ability to investigate breaches of the act where the individual had not been registered. We obviously didn't agree and asked for a stay. They actually said it affected our administrative reviews, which is the fact-finding stage of most of our files.
We were granted the stay in July or August. But on the investigation side, in terms of proceeding with them, we didn't know whether the court was going to uphold the decision, and the last thing we wanted to do was to have more reports being tabled in Parliament. We did not get that result until December. In February, the individual asked for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. We have 30 days to respond.
As well, there is a transition position that will allow the commissioner to look at the investigations previously done under the other regime.