What’s Hot on CanLII This Week

Here are the three most-consulted English-language cases on CanLII for the week of February 14 – 21.

1. R. v. Smickle 2012 ONSC 602

[1] At just before 2:00 am on March 9, 2009, Leroy Smickle was engaged in a very foolish act. He was alone in the apartment of his cousin, Rojohn Brown, having elected (because he had to be at work in the morning) to stay in while his cousin went out to a club. Mr. Smickle was reclining on the sofa, wearing boxer shorts, a white tank top, and sunglasses. Thus clad, he was in the process of taking his picture for his Facebook page, using the webcam on his laptop computer. For reasons known only to Mr. Smickle, and which arguably go beyond mere foolishness, he was posing in this manner with a loaded handgun in one hand. Unfortunately for Mr. Smickle, at this exact moment, members of the Toronto Police Emergency Task Force and the Guns and Gangs Squad were gathered outside the apartment preparing to execute a search warrant in relation to Mr. Brown, who was believed to be in possession of illegal firearms. They smashed in the door of the apartment with a battering ram, and Mr. Smickle was literally caught red-handed, with a loaded illegal firearm in his hand. He immediately dropped the gun and the computer, as ordered to by the police, and was thereupon arrested.

2.S.L. v. Commission scolaire des Chênes 2012 SCC 7

[1] The societal changes that Canada has undergone since the middle of the last century have brought with them a new social philosophy that favours the recognition of minority rights. The developments in the area of education that have taken place in Quebec and that are at issue in this appeal must be situated within this larger context. Given the religious diversity of present-day Quebec, the state can no longer promote a vision of society in public schools that is based on historically dominant religions.

3. Moore v. Bertuzzi 2012 ONSC 597

[1] This is a motion by the plaintiffs to compel production of a settlement agreement entered into by the defendants and a third party that resulted in a consensual dismissal of crossclaims between the defendants and of the third party claim. It is not a Mary Carter agreement, but like a Mary Carter agreement, it is a secret agreement among some but not all parties that ends adversity among the settling parties. The defendants resist production on the basis of settlement privilege.

The most frequently viewed French-language decision was S.L. c. Commission scolaire des Chênes 2012 CSC 7, as to which, see #2 above.

Comments are closed.