Canada’s online legal magazine.

Archive for ‘Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions’

Class Actions and the Competition Act – Will the SCC Take a Bite Out of Quizno’s?

Many class action and competition law lawyers will be anxiously awaiting whether the Supreme Court of Canada will grant leave tomorrow regarding the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Quizno’s Canada Restaurant Corporation v 2038724 Ontario Ltd, 2010 ONCA 466.

Most commentators regard the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal as making it easier for plaintiffs to have their class action lawsuits certified when claiming damages under the Competition Act.

At issue in that decision were allegations by some franchisees that the franchisor was overcharging for the food and supplies provided to franchisees and that this constituted, . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

The CRTC CKLN-FM 88.1 Decision

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) revoked the license of CKLN-FM 88.1 in Toronto, in a decision released on January 28, 2011.

CKLN was established in 1983 as Toronto’s first campus radio station, located on the campus of Ryerson Universiy. It features a variety of ethnic, cultural, and local programming, servicing multiple niche areas not addressed by mainstream radio stations. Their license was last renewed on August 13, 2007, for a seven-year period.

The station has been plagued by disputes and disorganization, resulting in the CRTC raising concerns over compliance with the Radio Regulations, 1986 and the CRTC’s Campus . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Culture Clash in Les Palais De Justice

Three years ago, the Quebec Ministère de la Justice published an exhaustive guide for relations between the media and the courts. The guide imposed access restrictions on journalists, who wanted much broader access to film, take photographs and conduct interviews in the public areas of courthouses, and they also want to broadcast the official audio recordings of court proceedings.. It was challenged constitutionally by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Groupe TVA, La Presse Ltée and the Fédération professionnelle des journalistes du Québec, as a breach of constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and media freedoms. After a seventeen day trial, . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Ezra Levant Ordered to Pay Costs

I previously covered the Vigna v. Levant decision, where Ezra Levant was ordered to remove defamatory blog posts against Giacamo Vigna.

At least one reader expressed interest in costs, as Vigna is a lawyer and was self-represented for part of the action. Justice Smith released the costs decision on January 26, 2011 and awarded Vigna over $32,500 plus taxes in costs, exceeding the $25,000 damages awarded in the judgment. . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Do Naturists Offend Public Order in the 21st Century?

Brian Coldin, a naturist and owner of a nude resort in Barrie, Ontario, considers clothing optional even in public places. Coldin has launched a constitutional challenge of the Criminal Code provisions against public nudity, saying the Code limits freedom of expression and is too broad. Coldin’s lawyer, Clayton Ruby, calls the Code’s nudity provisions an oddity, meaning they are outdated and improperly worded.
Posted in: Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions, Substantive Law: Legislation

Sigh 2

The problems aren’t always caused by unrepresented litigants.

  • The Attorney General of Canada v. Maria Valde, 2011 ONSC 328
  • “In the Matter of an Application pursuant to section 29 of the Extradition Act for an order committing the Respondent to await the Minister’s decision on whether the Respondent should be surrendered to the Republic of Hungary”
  • [1] The Republic of Hungary seeks the extradition of Maria Valde a.k.a. Maria Ramsay to face charges for conduct considered criminal in Canada, namely fraud. For the reasons that follow, I dismiss the application.
  • [7] The test for committal
. . . [more]
Posted in: Miscellaneous, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions


I’ve set out excerpts from just-released reasons. The words in square brackets are my comments.

Farrell v. The General of the Salvation Army, 2011 ONSC 317

  • [2] The Plaintiff’s Amended Statement of Claim (“the Claim”) comprises 226 pages and 2,589 paragraphs, some incorrectly numbered. The Claim names 62 Defendants but contains repetitions of some of them. The claims against eight of the Defendants have been dismissed.[1] There are currently claims against only 13 Defendants.
  • [3] The damage claim is $1,030,681,760. The Claim arises from alleged experiences the Plaintiff had during an 18 month stay at the Hope Shelter, an
. . . [more]
Posted in: Practice of Law, Substantive Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

When and How Can Lawyers Criticize Judges?

A lawyer’s ability to complain to a judge about the judge’s behaviour in court is about to be reviewed by the Supreme Court of Canada. The SCC will hear the appeal in Doré v Bernard. Gilles Doré was penalized by the Barreau du Québec for his letter to the judge of a case in which Mr. Doré had been counsel. Though the letter was marked private, the judge sent it to his Chief Justice, who sent it to the Barreau. More details are in this story in the Montreal Gazette. The text of the letter leads off the . . . [more]

Posted in: Practice of Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

R v. Chaytor and Parliamentary Privilege

At a meeting of lawyers yesterday, I heard one senior member refer to the decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in R v. Chaytor [2010] EWCA Crim 1910 as one of the best judgments he had read in a great many years. Intrigued, I took a look, and now I want to pass on to you the suggestion that you, too, read the judgment.

As the title of this post says, the case concerns a defence of parliamentary privilege. Criminal charges of fraud were laid against three members of the U.K. Parliament and one member of . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions

Freedom of Religion Not Fully Applicable to Civil Servants

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal recently released its decision as to whether marriage commissioners—as civil servants—can opt out of performing same-sex marriages. Why is this an issue? In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a landmark decision confirming the legal validity of same-sex marriage. Parliament then enacted legislation redefining marriage to include such unions. This led some marriage commissioners in Saskatchewan to refuse to solemnize same-sex marriages on the basis that they could not provide services in this regard without acting in violation of their personal religious beliefs.

The Saskatchewan government found this unacceptable. Since many religions do not . . . [more]

Posted in: Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions, Substantive Law: Legislation

Turning British and American – Updates to My LRW Site

Although I have the benefit of a number of internal online research guides where I work, I occasionally find myself resorting to my free legal research and writing site.

However, in so doing, I realized my site inadvertently emphasized Canadian law to the exclusion of most other foreign law. As such, I have updated the case law, legislation and government pages to include links to more British, American (and other common law) sites. I hope this will be more useful for researchers and I welcome suggestions for improving the site.

I have also added the 3 law-related movies . . . [more]

Posted in: Legal Information: Libraries & Research, Substantive Law: Foreign Law, Substantive Law: Judicial Decisions, Substantive Law: Legislation