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. R. v. Nyznik, 2017 ONSC 4392
 The Crown has failed to discharge its onus of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to the sexual acts she described. That does not mean that I necessarily believe the testimony of Mr. Nyznik that she freely and specifically consented to each and every act that occurred. It also does not mean that I necessarily prefer the evidence of Mr. Nyznik to the word of the complainant. It is not that I find him more credible than her. That is not the way the burden of proof and the standard of reasonable doubt work in a criminal trial.
2. McCarthy v Schindeler, 2017 ABQB 511
 This is not a documents case. It is a memories case. The memories of the events, over the span of a short few minutes roughly 12 years ago may be crucial to its outcome. Excerpts from the questioning of the Plaintiff (over a year ago) show that the Plaintiff’s memory of detail had faded. Although there are written incident reports produced in this lawsuit, I do not expect that they will be sufficient to permit a detailed recall of all of the pertinent events.http://canliiconnects.org/en/cases/2017abqb511
3. Flirty Girl Fitness Inc. v. Hottie Body Boutique Inc., 2017 ONSC 4969
 It may be noted that the pleading of professional negligence equates the alleged breach of fiduciary duty with professional negligence. There is nothing in the Statement of Claim that raises an issue about the standard of care in providing professional services. There is, for instance, nothing in the pleading that suggests that apart from the alleged breach of fiduciary duty that Mr. Epstein negligently drafted the documentation or failed to perform any services associated with the contract between Flirty Girl Fitness and Hottie Body Boutique. I shall return to this observation below.
The most-consulted French-language decision was Kalogerakis c. Commission scolaire des Patriotes, 2017 QCCA 1253
 Dans la première affaire, l’Appelant demande aux Commissions scolaires intimées de l’informer du montant total des honoraires professionnels d’avocats engagés en défense à une action collective complexe sur la question délicate « des mesures de dépistage de la dyslexie et des moyens pédagogiques adaptés pour les élèves atteints de ce trouble d’apprentissage ». Dans la seconde, la même demande est faite à la Ville concernant « plusieurs actions intentées par [un citoyen] contre l’intimée, particulièrement en déontologie policière et en responsabilité civile à la suite d’événements qui se sont produits en 2006 ».
* 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.