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. Cozzi v. Sidiropoulos, 2018 ONSC 309
 At that time, as part of the transfer of the file to his carriage, Mr. Sidiropoulos undertook to Mr. Cozzi to “protect” Mr. Cozzi’s account. Mr. Sidiropoulos claims that he understood that his undertaking was contingent upon Mr. Cozzi delivering his complete file material on a timely basis in order to permit the action to proceed expeditiously. Mr. Sidiropoulos claimed that never happened and that Mr. Cozzi’s delay in transferring the file materials negatively affected Mr. Hunwicks’ action. It is undisputed that Mr. Sidiropoulos later revoked this undertaking. When Mr. Hunwicks’ personal injury claim settled, Mr Sidiropoulos paid out a small component of Mr. Cozzi’s account that was not in dispute, but he did not remit the $3,481.70 disputed portion of Mr. Cozzi’s account. Mr. Sidiropoulos claimed that Mr. Hunwicks had instructed him not to pay, on the basis that Mr. Cozzi had failed to deliver the complete file material as he had undertaken to do, and on the basis he had negligently handled the file.
2. British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Brecknell, 2018 BCCA 5
 In support of its argument, the Attorney General relied on this Court’s decision in Equustek for the proposition that the court has in personam jurisdiction over Craigslist because, by conducting business in BC, it has a real and substantial connection to the province. Moreover, the Attorney General referred to comments made in the House of Commons explaining one purpose of amendments to the Criminal Code providing for production orders. The gist of that explanation was that the new orders would authorize persons having possession or control over information to produce it no matter where it was located. Indeed, the comments specifically referred to the problem created by “inexpensive overseas data warehousing.”
3. R v Derrick, 2018 ABPC 4
 This case demonstrates the operation and application of fundamental aspects of the Rule of Law, a cornerstone of Canadian constitutional democracy. We are all bound to obey the law, and are all entitled to the full measure and protection of that law regardless of circumstance or background. Mr. Arkinstall is entitled to the full protection of the Criminal Code, just as the accused, Brant Derrick, is entitled to all of the protections and safeguards that apply to every person charged with an offence.
The most-consulted French-language decision was Société de transport de Montréal c. Joubert, 2018 QCCS 58
 À cette fin, l’usager doit, sur demande, permettre à un préposé de vérifier, d’une part, s’il a acquitté son droit de passage conformément à la tarification et à la réglementation en vigueur et, d’autre part, la validité du titre et la conformité du support utilisé.
 La question au cœur du pourvoi de l’appelante est de savoir si les droits constitutionnels des usagers à la présomption d’innocence et à la protection contre les détentions arbitraires empêchent les inspecteurs de la STM de procéder à une vérification aléatoire de la possession d’un titre de transport valide, sans motifs ni soupçons raisonnables.
* 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.