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:
- R. v. Boyes 2013 BCPC 204
 Mr. Boyes is charged with three offences, alleged to have been committed in the early morning hours of September 22, 2012: (i) dangerous driving, contrary to section 249(1)(a) of the Criminal Code; (ii) failing to stop when pursued by police officer, contrary to section 249.1(1) of the Criminal Code; and (iii) failing to comply with demand for a breath sample which was made to him under section 254 of the Criminal Code.
- Rains v. Molea 2013 ONSC 5016
 Fundamental to the resolution of this case is the interpretation of the Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42 (the “Act”). When interpreting the Act, courts must strive to strike a delicate “balance between promoting the public interest in the encouragement and dissemination of works of the arts and intellect and obtaining a just reward for the creator … The proper balance among these and other public policy objectives lies not only in recognizing the creator’s rights but in giving due weight to their limited nature”: Théberge v. Galerie d’Art du Petit Champlain Inc., 2002 SCC 34 (CanLII), 2002 SCC 34,  2 S.C.R. 336, at paras. 30-31. In my view, given the facts in this case, the proper balance among these objectives is served by dismissing the plaintiff’s claim. These are my reasons.
- Leduc v. Roman 2009 CanLII 6838 (ON SC)
 Over the past few years Canadian popular culture has embraced www.facebook.com (“Facebook”), a social networking website, as a means by which to reveal one’s personal life to other members of the community – one’s “Facebook friends”. In this motor vehicle action the defendant, Janice Roman, appeals from the decision of Master Dash made August 14, 2008, dismissing her motion to compel production from the plaintiff, John Leduc, of all pages on his Facebook webpage (also called a Facebook profile).
The most-consulted French-language decision was Longueuil (Ville de) c. Lachapelle 2013 QCCA 1288
 L’appelante se pourvoit contre un jugement rendu le 16 juin 2011 par la Cour supérieure, district de Longueuil (l’honorable Carol Cohen) qui confirme un jugement rendu le 25 octobre 2010 par la Cour municipale de Longueuil (l’honorable Bruno Themens), aux termes duquel l’intimé est acquitté du chef d’accusation suivant :
D’avoir, le 11 août 2009, contrevenu à l’article 213 du Code de la sécurité routière, en ayant été propriétaire d’un véhicule qui n’était pas en bon état de fonctionnement (il manquait un boulon à une roue). (09-21031).