[Thursday:] What’s Hot on CanLII

[Here are the cases that were unavailable yesterday.]

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. Marine Services International Ltd. v. Ryan Estate 2013 SCC 4

    [1] The sea took the lives of two fishermen off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador. Their estates sought compensation in tort from parties allegedly responsible for their death. This appeal raises the issue of whether the statutory bar of action in s. 44 of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Act, R.S.N.L. 1990, c. W-11 (the “WHSCA”) applies and bars a negligence action initiated under s. 6(2) of the Marine Liability Act, S.C. 2001, c. 6 (the “MLA”). The widows and dependants of the deceased fishermen commenced the action after having received compensation under the WHSCA.

  2. Law Society of Upper Canada v. James Maurice Melnick 2013 ONLSAP 27

    [1] Janet Leiper (for the panel):– On December 2, 2009 the appellant, James Maurice Melnick, applied for a Class L1 licence to the Law Society of Upper Canada. His application disclosed that in May and August of 2006 he pleaded guilty to two criminal charges in the Ontario Court of Justice. He was sentenced in August of 2006 to six months in jail, followed by a conditional sentence of 15 months. The offences arose from sexual conduct that he had engaged in with his former student. He was a 28 year old teacher at the time. The complainant was a 14 year old grade nine student. After the appellant lost his teacher’s licence he completed law school, articling, and the requisite examinations.

  3. Bowen v Aviva Canada Inc 2013 CanLII 47861 (ON SC)

    3. Bowen was involved in a motor vehicle accident on or about November 19, 2010 where his car sustained damages when it was rear-ended by another vehicle.

    4. Bowen is claiming damages of $25,000, including $7,000 for punitive damages, for breach of contract by the defendant and negligence . . .

The most-consulted French-language decision was Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse c. Delisle 2013 QCTDP 17

[1] La Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse (ci-après citée la « Commission ») s’est adressée au Tribunal des droits de la personne (ci-après cité le « Tribunal ») déclarant que la victime et plaignante devant la Commission, madame Francine Beaumont, a subi une atteinte à son droit à la sauvegarde de sa dignité, de sa réputation et de son honneur suite au courriel envoyé par le défendeur, monsieur Robert Delisle, comportant des propos haineux à son égard au motif de sa condition sociale de prestataire de la Sécurité du revenu et parce qu’elle mendiait, contrairement aux articles 4 et 10 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne[1] (ci-après citée la « Charte »).

Comments are closed.