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. Wilcox v Alberta, 2020 ABCA 104 (CanLII)
 The foregoing suggests that there is an important difference between an initial placement in a given facility (often stemming from a security classification) and placing an inmate in solitary confinement within that facility. While the former might not implicate habeas corpus to the extent it forms part of the initial deprivation of liberty that is not being challenged, where an inmate is transferred into solitary confinement within, for example, a medium security prison, even upon arrival and without having first been placed into general population, that segregation will constitute a further deprivation over and above the deprivation of being in medium security. For that reason, habeas corpus will always be available to challenge placement in solitary confinement pursuant to the CCRA.
2. Chen v. TD Waterhouse Canada Inc., 2020 ONSC 1477 (CanLII)
 Concurrent liability may arise in tort even when the relationship among the parties is governed by contracts. Central Trust Co. v. Rafuse, 1986 CanLII 29 (SCC). The duty of care must be separate from the parties’ contractual duties although it can be limited by the contract terms. Here, the scope of any independent duty of care owing by TD Waterhouse is expressly limited by the contract to “gross negligence” and “willful misconduct”. Even if these contractual limitations did not apply, Mr. Chen has provided no evidence of there being a separate duty or standard of care in the industry that was breached by any act of TD Waterhouse.
3. R v Walter, 2020 ABQB 181 (CanLII)
 When evaluating whether court litigation gatekeeping steps are appropriate the Court may refer to the litigant’s entire public dispute history, include proceedings before non-court tribunals: Unrau #2, at para 580; Thompson v International Union of Operating Engineers Local No 955, 2017 ABCA 193 at para 25, leave to appeal to SCC refused, 37974 (7 June 2018).
The most-consulted French-language decision was Donaldson c. Autorité des marchés financiers, 2020 QCCA 401 (CanLII)
 Dans cette affaire, la Cour suprême devait notamment déterminer si l’intimé Blencoe avait droit à une réparation fondée sur les principes du droit administratif en raison du délai imputable à l’État dans les procédures engagées contre lui en matière de droits de la personne, et ce, même si la longueur de ce délai, soit environ 32 mois, n’avait pas porté atteinte à sa capacité de répondre aux plaintes portées contre lui.
* 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.