Canada’s online legal magazine.

Archive for ‘Wednesday: What’s Hot on CanLII’ Feature

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. Pourshian v. Walt Disney Company, 2021 ONSC 4840 (CanLII)

[48] In my view, these are pleading issues that are not properly addressed on a jurisdiction motion. As held by the Court of Appeal in Rothmans, at para. 106, “the motion judge is not required to subject the pleadings to the scrutiny applicable on a rule 21 motion”. In this case, . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Libfeld v. Libfeld, 2021 ONSC 4670 (CanLII)

[445] As noted above, s. 35(f) of the Partnerships Act allows for the dissolution of a partnership and s. 207 of the OBCA provides this Court with the jurisdiction to wind-up a company in various circumstances, including circumstances where it is just and equitable to do so “for some reason, other than bankruptcy or . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Arksey v Sky Zone Toronto, 2021 ONSC 4594 (CanLII)

[58] The exclusions here do not undermine the terms of the agreement. The defendant was not deceptive in the least. The defendant is not, for example, promising insurance coverage, and then taking it away in exclusions in the small type. The deal here was that the plaintiff could use the defendant’s facility . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Norheim v Chief Judge of the Provincial Court of Alberta, 2021 ABQB 465 (CanLII)

[38] While the privative clause does purport to preclude any judicial review, that is not the law. For at least the last 40 years, case law has held that no privative clause enacted by any Legislature can remove a Superior Court’s jurisdiction to review actions and decisions . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Hawkes v. Max Aicher (North America) Limited, 2021 ONSC 4290 (CanLII)

[17] In this case, we are concerned exclusively with statutory construction. Matters of statutory interpretation, like other questions of law, are evaluated on a reasonableness standard. As a reviewing court, in accordance with the guidance of Vavilov on the application of the reasonableness standard, we do not undertake a de novo . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Working Families Ontario v. Ontario, 2021 ONSC 4076 (CanLII)

[63] It is with the minimal impairment portion of the Oakes test that the rubber of Bill 254 hits the slippery road of justification, causing the EFA vehicle to skid off course.

[64] The government’s own evidence demonstrates that less impairing measures were available to it than those contained in the Impugned Sections. . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. R v Russell, 2021 SKPC 31 (CanLII)

[27] I find the commentary by The Honourable Gilles Renaud, Ontario Court of Justice author of “The Sentencing Code of Canada – Principles and Objectives”, (2009) paragraph §3.52 helpful. Judge Renaud is referring to police officers, but I find it aptly gives the reason why general deterrence is required in such assaults against frontline . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Lu v Shen, 2020 BCSC 490 (CanLII)

[42] It is the role of pleadings to serve as the frame for an action. Properly drawn, they precisely define the issues the court will be asked to decide, they advise the other party of the case to be met, they determine the extent of pre-trial procedures, and they guide the trial process. The . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Moffat v Edmonton (City) Police Service, 2021 ABCA 183 (CanLII)

[63] Newton established (at para 84) that the LERB’s mandate is “more robust” when considering the acceptability of particular police conduct or the integrity of the discipline process pursuant to its civilian oversight mandate. Of course, this is not technically a standard of review issue allowing for different degrees of reasonableness, . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Ojanen v. Acumen Law Corporation, 2021 BCCA 189 (CanLII)

[57] Historically, damages in a wrongful dismissal action were limited to the loss suffered as a result of the employer’s failure to give proper notice: Addis v. Gramophone Co., [1909] A.C. 488 (H.L.). As this Court explained in Marchen v. Dams Ford Lincoln Sales Ltd., 2010 BCCA 29 at paras. . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Hamza v. Law Society of Ontario et al, 2021 ONSC 2023 (CanLII)

[27] The Notice of Application, affidavit and Factum filed by the applicant together amount to over 1,000 pages of rambling, pseudo-intellectual attacks on the LSO and the other respondents, expressions of his opinion on their character and integrity, racist and misogynist attacks on the respondents and the judiciary, arguments . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII

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. Prowse et al. v. Noroozi, 2021 ONSC 3099 (CanLII)

[52] There is no genuine issue that the Plaintiffs are entitled to claim the foregone interest on the VTB. While not an out of pocket expense per se, it would be a recoverable loss to the Plaintiffs in the form of expectation damages. However, I would infer that the purpose of the . . . [more]

Posted in: Wednesday: What's Hot on CanLII