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. Pyrrha Design Inc v Plum and Posey Inc, 2016 ABCA 12

[10] And, quite apart from avoiding the multiplicity of actions – the mischief sought to be avoided by s 8 of the Judicature Act and R 1.3 of the Alberta Rules of Court, a proposition for which there is also ample case authority – the chambers judge properly adhered to the urging of the Supreme Court of Canada in Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7 (CanLII), [2014] 1 SCR 87 to the effect that courts are obliged to resolve legal disputes in the most cost-effective and timely method available, provided the process selected ensures fairness between the parties. Here, the chambers judge is to be commended, not criticized, for pursuing a cost-effective, timely final resolution to this litigation which was fair and just to the parties, as it simply serves no one’s interest to permit continuation of protracted and costly litigation when it can be properly disposed of summarily and entirely.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Google Inc., 2015 BCCA 265

[3] Google contends that the injunction ought not to have been granted because the application did not have a sufficient connection to the Province to give the Supreme Court of British Columbia competence to deal with the matter. It also argues that the injunction represents an inappropriate burden on an innocent non-party to the litigation. Further, it contends that the extraterritorial reach of the injunction is inappropriate and a violation of principles of comity. Finally, Google contends that the injunction should not have been granted because of its effect on freedom of speech.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. R. v Schoer, 2016 ONSC 1127

[5] Over a period of approximately eight years, Mr. Schoer lured long-time friends and clients who trusted him into sham schemes, resulting in significant losses for many victims. While some of the transactions were legitimate, the majority of the transactions about which the victims testified, were not. Specifically, this court found that the transactions related to the Hyberlab debenture were fraudulent in their entirety. Given the amount of evidence that unfolded during the trial, it would be impossible to summarize each and every transaction, but using the Hyberlab transactions as an example, this court found that Mr. Schoer sold “placements” in a debenture, which he claimed he owned. I found that, in fact, Mr. Schoer did not own the debenture and the conditions under which he may have had some rights to it had long expired. He did not advise the victims of this, nor did he tell them when the premise on which the debenture had allegedly been granted to him had completely changed. Rather, Mr. Schoer continued to encourage the victims and tell them that their investments were doing well and, in some cases, had even doubled.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was Institut Philippe Pinel de Montréal c. A.G., 1994 CanLII 6105 (QC CA)

AUTORISE, pour une période de deux ans à compter de la date de cet arrêt, l’appelant à traiter l’intimé contre son gré, en lui administrant des médicaments antispychotiques et les autres médicaments jugés nécessaires pour atténuer ou combattre les effets secondaires des premiers;

(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.

Comments are closed.