Wednesday: What’s Hot on CanLII

Each Wednesday we tell you which three English-language cases and which French-language case have been the most viewed on CanLII and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about.

For this last week:

  1. Canadian National Railway Co. v. McKercher LLP 2013 SCC 39

    [1] Can a law firm accept a retainer to act against a current client on a matter unrelated to the client’s existing files? More specifically, can a firm bring a lawsuit against a current client on behalf of another client? If not, what remedies are available to the client whose lawyer has brought suit against it? These are the questions raised by this appeal.

  2. York University v. Michael Markicevic 2013 ONSC 4311

    [1] Formally, this motion involves a request by one defendant, Mima Markicevic, for an order discharging a certificate of pending litigation which I previously had ordered against her Vaughan Residence, on the provision of alternate security for the proprietary claim of the plaintiff, York University. More substantively, the motion raises important questions about the practical availability of access to the civil justice system.

  3. Bernier v. Nygard International Partnership. 2013 ONSC 4578

    [1] Upon being terminated from her employment, the Plaintiff received the minimum statutory salary and benefits required under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, SO 2000, C 41 (the “Act”). She claims that this fell far below the amounts to which she has a right at common law.

    [2] The Plaintiff here moves for summary judgment under Rule 20 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. She seeks the monetary difference between the statutory entitlements and her common law rights.

The most-consulted French-language decision was Compagnie des chemins de fer nationaux du Canada c. McKercher LLP 2013 CSC 39

[1] Un cabinet d’avocats peut‑il accepter le mandat d’agir contre un de ses clients actuels dans une affaire sans lien avec les dossiers en cours de ce client? Plus précisément, un cabinet d’avocats peut‑il poursuivre son client actuel pour le compte d’un autre client? Dans la négative, quels recours s’offrent au client poursuivi par son avocat? Telles sont les questions que soulève le présent pourvoi.

Comments are closed.