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. Servus Credit Union Ltd v Parlee, 2015 ABQB 700

[12] Mr. Parlee said he has “100% legal title to the estate”, and relied on documents in an Affidavit he had filed on July 20, 2015. He claimed his signature “… creates the currency.” His authority to sign comes from his certificate of live birth. His documents were no different from others used in international commerce. They had been filed to the treasury board who “would look after everything.” He argued that “UCC 3603” and its Bills of Exchange Act equivalent meant the Parlees’ debt was discharged. He concluded:

I made order as a private person. … Sir, I order this case closed, and all settlements looked after. I’m asking for an order to have this case sealed, and my files returned to me. I order this.
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. R. v Shofman, 2015 ONSC 6876

[48] I am compelled to observe that this kind difficult post-trial, appellate assessment of much earlier interactions between defence counsel and their accused client would be made much simpler and less prone to potential factual errors, if defence counsel adopted the sensible practice of taking at least some notes of their important interactions with their clients, and taking clear written instructions from their clients on critical issues in their cases, such as whether or not the accused should and would be testifying. See M. Proulx and D. Layton, Ethics and Canadian Criminal Law (2001), at pp. 163-164; R. v. W.E.B., at para. 10, Malton v. Attia, 2015 ABQB 135 (CanLII), [2015] 4 W.W.R. 260, at paras. 39, 67, 97-103.

[49] In the absence of such contemporaneous, reliable, objective records, in subsequent appellate court litigation regarding “ineffective assistance” claims, which may potentially unfold years later, trial counsel is left to try to recall the details of such interactions without the benefit of any type of aide-mémoire, and the appellate court is left to assess the reliability of such recollections without any objective verification.
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. Wide v TD Bank, 2015 ONSC 6900

[23] Essentially, the claim alleges that as SIB’s correspondent bank from the 1990s to 2009, TD failed to act in accordance with the standard of care applicable to a reasonable banker. The plaintiffs allege that TD failed to conduct proper due diligence before it started providing banking services to an Antiguan off-shore bank, and compounded its negligence by continuing to provide banking services to SIB for 20 years. They allege that TD ignored public information and red flags that should have led it to terminate SIB’s access to TD’s facilities, report the conduct of Stanford and others to the appropriate authorities, and/or freeze SIB’s accounts. The claim further alleges that TD is liable for providing knowing assistance in the breaches of duties and breaches of trust by Stanford and others.
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was Boulad c. 21008805 Ontario inc., 2014 QCCS 1928

[43] Pour tout employé soucieux de progresser dans sa carrière, l’identité et la réputation de l’employeur peuvent revêtir une grande importance. Du choix de se joindre à une entreprise plutôt qu’à une autre pourra dépendre qualité et environnement de travail, conditions salariales et avantages sociaux, possibilités d’avancement, responsabilités, opportunités internationales, prestige, etc. D’ailleurs, nombreuses sont les sociétés qui investissent des ressources importantes dans des activités de recrutement où elles voudront se montrer sous leur meilleur jour. L’identité de l’employeur, aspect peut-être moins tangible[25] que le salaire, s’inscrit néanmoins au cœur du contrat de travail, en devient une condition essentielle.
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

* As of January 2014 we measure the total amount of time spent on the pages rather than simply the number of hits; as well, a case once mentioned won’t appear again for three months