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. Comeau, 2018 SCC 15
 The respondent, Mr. Gerard Comeau, contends that s. 121 is essentially a free trade provision — in his view, no barriers can be erected to impede the passage of goods across provincial boundaries. On the other side of the debate, the appellant, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of New Brunswick (“the Crown”), argues that s. 121 was only intended to dismantle the power to impose tariffs or tariff-like charges at provincial boundaries. The trial judge agreed with Mr. Comeau. The question before us is whether he erred in doing so. What does it mean for articles to be “admitted free” as stated in s. 121? How does that requirement constrain state action? Fundamentally, does s. 121 constitutionalize some particular form of economic union? These questions lie at the core of this appeal.
2. d’Abadie v Her Majesty the Queen, 2018 ABQB 298
 OPCA schemes are “commercial” since they are taught for pay by “gurus” (Meads v Meads, paras 85-153), who promise these techniques will make their users immune from government requirements such as an obligation to pay income tax and to adhere to motor vehicle regulations. These techniques allegedly can be used as ‘get out of jail free’ cards versus any criminal offence, and as a way to unilaterally extract funds from their perceived enemies (Meads v Meads, para 73).
3. Hryniak v. Mauldin,  1 SCR 87, 2014 SCC 7
 Increasingly, there is recognition that a culture shift is required in order to create an environment promoting timely and affordable access to the civil justice system. This shift entails simplifying pre-trial procedures and moving the emphasis away from the conventional trial in favour of proportional procedures tailored to the needs of the particular case. The balance between procedure and access struck by our justice system must come to reflect modern reality and recognize that new models of adjudication can be fair and just.
The most-consulted French-language decision was Macduff c. Vacances Sunwing inc., 2018 QCCS 1510
 Par sa Demande remodifiée, il recherche une diminution de sa prestation et des dommages-intérêts moraux et punitifs au motif que Sunwing aurait commis des pratiques commerciales trompeuses et fait des fausses représentations en vendant des vols et forfaits vacances incluant un « service au champagne », sans toutefois servir un vin mousseux provenant de la région de Champagne, en France. Il sollicite l’autorisation d’intenter une action collective pour le compte du groupe suivant :
* 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.