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. Bazos v. Bell Media Inc., 2018 ONSC 7462

[7] The Applicant submits that she is a public interest litigant and that she should be subject to the discretionary rule that is sometimes applied in public interest litigation that no costs, or reduced costs, are ordered. The Applicant submits that costs should not be awarded against her. Alternatively, the Applicant submits that the amount claimed exceeds the amount that would be fair and reasonable.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. R. v. Boudreault, 2018 SCC 58

[3] Many of the people involved in our criminal justice system are poor, live with addiction or other mental health issues, and are otherwise disadvantaged or marginalized. When unable to pay the victim surcharge, they face what becomes, realistically, an indeterminate sentence. As long as they cannot pay, they may be taken into police custody, imprisoned for default, prevented from seeking a pardon, and targeted by collection agencies. In effect, not only are impecunious offenders treated far more harshly than those with access to the requisite funds, their inability to pay this part of their debt to society may further contribute to their disadvantage and stigmatization.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. R. v. Nolet, [2010] 1 SCR 851, 2010 SCC 24

[1] Binnie J. — This appeal is concerned with police search powers incident to random stops under the Saskatchewan Highways and Transportation Act, 1997, S.S. 1997, c. H-3.01 (“H&TA”), and, in particular, whether the police conduct in this case amounted to an abuse of their statutory stop and search powers so as to render evidence of drug dealing and the “proceeds of crime” inadmissible under s. 8 or s. 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[2] The appellants were travelling eastward along the Saskatchewan portion of the Trans-Canada Highway with a passenger (now deceased) in an empty 53-foot commercial tractor-trailer unit licensed in Quebec. When pulled over by an RCMP officer in a “spot check”, it emerged the truck’s registration was not prorated to include the province. The appropriate fuel sticker had expired. The appellant Nolet produced a logbook that was incomplete but indicated that the truck normally operated east of the Manitoba border. One discovery led to another and in the end the police found $115,000 in cash in the truck and 392 pounds of marijuana, valued at somewhere between $1.1 million to $1.5 million, concealed in a secret compartment in the trailer. The appellants were charged in a multi-count indictment alleging (1) trafficking, (2) possession of marijuana for the purposes of trafficking, and (3) possession of proceeds of crime in excess of $5,000. The trial judge found Charter breaches and excluded the evidence (2006 SKQB 393 (CanLII), 283 Sask. R. 159). She acquitted the appellants. The Court of Appeal, Jackson J.A. dissenting in part, reversed (2009 SKCA 8 (CanLII), 320 Sask. R. 179).

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was Bramante c. Restaurants McDonald’s du Canada limitée, 2018 QCCS 4852

[1] Le demandeur Antonio Bramante et son avocat demandent d’autoriser une action collective contre Restaurants McDonald du Canada limitée ( « McDonald » ) en raison de ce qu’ils considèrent de la publicité illégale ciblant les enfants de moins de 13 ans.

[2] La publicité contestée consiste à faire l’étalage, à l’intérieur des divers restaurants, de jouets qu’il est possible d’acheter distinctement ou en même temps qu’un repas Joyeux festin (Happy Meal) destiné à un enfant.

(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.