Today

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. Murillo v Turnbull, 2016 ONSC 1906

[26] Taking on a personal injury file on a contingent fee basis is a gamble. The law firm puts up their own money to fund disbursements, and carries their work in progress on their books unbilled, in the expectation that they will ultimately reap a generous reward when the case is concluded by a settlement or judgment. In many or most cases, the firm stands to recover as much as 1/3 of the client’s award, which usually amounts to substantially more than the firm would earn on the basis of hourly billings.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. Fulawka v Bank of Nova Scotia, 2016 ONSC 1576

[1] This “bank overtime” action has settled – for the second time. It was certified as a class proceeding[1] in February, 2010 and settled (for the first time) in August, 2014. In my decision approving the first Settlement,[2] I congratulated the parties and their counsel for achieving a resolution that not only reflected well on the defendant Bank of Nova Scotia (“the Bank”) but was fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the class. The Settlement did not stipulate any final compensation amount – instead, it set out a simple and straightforward claims process.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. A.B. v Canada (Attorney General), 2016 ONSC 1912

[48] As the discussion above has repeatedly noted, the matter to be determined is whether the circumstances of A.B. satisfy the criteria for a physician-assisted death as specified by the Supreme Court in Carter-2016, which criteria were derived from Carter-2015.

[49] Having reviewed the evidentiary record, I conclude that A.B. satisfies the criteria; namely: (1) he is a competent adult person; (2) he has a grievous and irremediable medical condition including an illness, disease or disability; (3) his condition is causing him to suffer enduring intolerable suffering; (4) his suffering cannot be alleviated by any treatment available to him that he finds acceptable; and (5) he clearly consents to the termination of life.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was Jodoin c. Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales, 2015 QCCA 847

[118] De l’avis de ce Tribunal, il faut répondre oui à toutes ces questions. Me Jodoin a abusé de l’utilisation de l’article 25 des Règles de procédure et de son ordonnance de sursis. Sa préparation, sur l’heure du dîner du 23 avril 2013, d’une série de requêtes en émission d’un bref de prohibition, dans une situation juridique qui ne commandait nullement une telle procédure, tout autant que le maintien de la présentation de ces procédures, constituent deux gestes réfléchis et ne résultent pas de l’ignorance des règles de droit par Me Jodoin, un habile stratège qui défend ses clients avec vigueur, quand il est présent à la Cour.

(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.

Start the discussion!

Leave a Reply

(Your email address will not be published or distributed)