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. Groia v. The Law Society of Upper Canada, 2016 ONCA 471

[101] But it is a far different thing to argue, as Mr. Groia does, that a trial judge’s authority to supervise and control the progress of the trial and the conduct of its participants constrains the Law Society’s exercise of its statutory jurisdiction to regulate a lawyer’s in-court conduct in the public interest. This unprecedented argument, if accepted, would sanction the abrogation by the Law Society of its responsibilities to the public and the legal profession, as expressly vested in it by the legislature.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. Canadian Council for Refugees v. Canada, [2008] 3 FCR 606, 2007 FC 1262

[1] The Canadian Council for Refugees (CCR), the Canadian Council of Churches (CCC), Amnesty International (AI) and John Doe, a Colombian refugee claimant in the United States, filed a judicial review application challenging the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for Cooperation in the Examination of Refugee Status Claims from Nationals of Third Countries [December 5, 2002, [2004] Can. T.S. No. 2], also known as the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA). This agreement, which was enacted in its current form as part of the Smart Border Declaration: Building a Smart Border for the 21st Century on the Foundation of a North American Zone of Confidence [Ottawa, December 12, 2001] (Smart Border) and came into force in December 29, 2004, deems (subject to limited exceptions) a foreign national who attempts to enter Canada at a land border from a “designated country” ineligible to make a refugee claim.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. Sabean v. Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co., 2017 SCC 7

[1] This case involves the interpretation of the Nova Scotia SEF 44 Endorsement, an excess insurance policy. This Endorsement is a standard form contract that exists in similar terms across the country. Canadians purchase these policies, sometimes called Special or Family Protection Endorsements, in addition to their existing automobile insurance coverage. These endorsements indemnify insureds for any shortfall in the payment of a judgment for damages against an underinsured tortfeasor, subject to the deductions set out in the Endorsement. The scope of one such deduction is at issue in this appeal.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was Desmarais c. Autorité des marchés financiers, 2017 QCCQ 176

[201] Le droit de l’inculpé et du public à tenir un procès dans un délai raisonnable n’est pas toujours proportionnel au préjudice de l’accusé puisque l’administration de la justice peut aussi en souffrir[100].
[202] Ici, les requérants font face à une longue peine d’incarcération et les délais prolongent la stigmatisation de telles infractions. Plus particulièrement à l’endroit de M. Desmarais dont le travail à titre d’avocat en est affecté.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

* 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.

Comments are closed.