Here are the three most-consulted English-language cases on CanLII for the week of November 14 – 21.
♨ 1. Batty v. City of Toronto 2011 ONSC 6862 [The occupy TO injunction case, #1 by a large margin]
 Since October 15, 2011, the applicants and other protesters (the “Protesters”), have encamped overnight in St. James Park (the “Park”) as part of the “Occupy Toronto” movement which, as a branch of the Global Occupy Movement, has posed, in its own way and in many cities, the questions: How do we live together in a community? How do we share common space? In Toronto the expression of those questions has assumed a specific form – the creation of an encampment in the Park in downtown Toronto at which the Protesters express a variety of political views and from which they sally forth in periodic demonstrations to take their messages to other parts of this city.
♨ 2. Reference re: Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada 2011 BCSC 1588
 I have concluded that this case is essentially about harm; more specifically, Parliament’s reasoned apprehension of harm arising out of the practice of polygamy. This includes harm to women, to children, to society and to the institution of monogamous marriage.
♨ 3. Elfarnawani v. International Olympic Committee 2011 ONSC 6784
 The plaintiff, Mahmoud Elfarnawani, has commenced an action against the defendants, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and its internal Ethics Commission (EC), claiming damages for the torts of defamation, breach of a duty of good faith, and abuse of process. The action flows from the decision of the IOC, acting on the recommendation of the EC, to declare the plaintiff personae [sic] non grata within the Olympic Movement and to recommend that the members of the Olympic family not grant him any accreditation or have any dealings with him. The IOC posted this decision on its internet website. The defendants now move, under rule 21.01(3)(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, for an order staying the plaintiff’s claim on the basis that the court has no jurisdiction over the action. Alternatively, the defendants contend that the court should decline jurisdiction on the basis that Switzerland is the more convenient forum for a trial of this action. For the reasons that follow, I agree with the defendants, and grant the motion staying the plaintiff’s action.
 This appeal involves the claim of the Lax Kw’alaams First Nation and other First Nations listed in the Appendix to these reasons (herein collectively referred to as “Lax Kw’alaams”), whose ancestral lands stretch along the northwest coast of British Columbia between the estuaries of the Nass and lower Skeena Rivers, to the commercial harvesting and sale of “all species of fish” within their traditional waters.