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. Barton, 2019 SCC 33

[1] We live in a time where myths, stereotypes, and sexual violence against women[1] — particularly Indigenous women and sex workers — are tragically common. Our society has yet to come to grips with just how deep-rooted these issues truly are and just how devastating their consequences can be. Without a doubt, eliminating myths, stereotypes, and sexual violence against women is one of the more pressing challenges we face as a society. While serious efforts are being made by a range of actors to address and remedy these failings both within the criminal justice system and throughout Canadian society more broadly, this case attests to the fact that more needs to be done. Put simply, we can — and must — do better.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. R. v. Omar, 2018 ONCA 975

[2] On this appeal, the Crown does not contest that the appellant was detained and that his Charter rights were violated. The sole issue is whether the trial judge erred by refusing to exclude the evidence on the basis that the police acted in good faith and did not believe that they had detained the appellant.

[3] The appellant challenges the finding of good faith police conduct. He submits that as the police acted in ignorance of or with disregard for well-established law limiting police powers, the finding of good faith cannot stand and the evidence should be excluded pursuant to s. 24(2).

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), 2019 BCCA 181

[104] At the end of the day, the NEB is the body entrusted with regulating the flow of energy resources across Canada to export markets. Although the principle of subsidiarity has understandable appeal, the TMX project is not only a ‘British Columbia project’. The project affects the country as a whole, and falls to be regulated taking into account the interests of the country as a whole.

[105] Both the law relating to the division of powers and the practicalities surrounding the TMX project lead to the conclusion, then, that the pith and substance of the proposed Part 2.1 is to place conditions on, and if necessary, prohibit, the carriage of heavy oil thorough an interprovincial undertaking. Such legislation does not in its pith and substance relate to “Property … in the Province” or to “Matters of a merely local or private Nature”, but to Parliament’s jurisdiction in respect of federal undertakings under s. 92(10) of the Constitution Act. Contrary to Mr. Arvay’s submission, this conclusion does not reflect a ‘sea change’ in the law, a return to ‘watertight’ compartments of jurisdiction or a diminution of co-operative federalism. Rather it reflects the more basic principle that ss. 91 and 92 provide for “exclusive” heads of power that have substantive content.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision was MédiaQMI inc. c. Murray-Hall, 2019 QCCS 1922

[57] Donc, le Tribunal conclut de l’analyse de tous ces éléments que Le Journal de Mourréal a été conçu pour imiter l’apparence générale des publications diffusées sous la marque Le Journal de Montréal, y compris la marque de commerce elle-même. Quoi qu’en pense Murray-Hall, Le Journal de Mourréal prête à confusion avec Le Journal de Montréal et contrevient ainsi à l’article 20(1)a) de la LMC.

(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.