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. Enviro Hazmat Emergency Response Inc. v Olson, 2018 ABPC 286
[4] Some motorists prefer to deal with the original manufacturer rather than buy aftermarket replacement parts. Part of the appeal with Ford parts, is that Ford guarantees their products. If an aftermarket product fails, the remedy is with the company who made the product, not Ford. Some of these aftermarket companies may be under contract to only make parts exclusively for Ford. They make a part for Ford (as an OEM), then Ford puts it into their vehicles as a genuine Ford part. However, this Ford supplier (OEM) may also supply parts to aftermarket stores to sell that same product, if the OEM is not restricted by an exclusive arrangement with Ford. This original equipment manufacturer is supplying both the Ford market and the aftermarket. Again, if one buys the part from Ford, there is a Ford warranty. If one buys from an aftermarket store like the international NAPA stores, or a smaller aftermarket business, the warranty is with that supplier.
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)
2. Dhillon v. PM Management Systems Inc., 2014 ONSC 5407
[11] When an uncontemplated event or circumstance occurs after the signing of a contract that without default of either party makes the performance of the contract impossible or would make performance a radically different thing than what was promised or intended by the parties or that strikes at the root of the agreement, both parties may be discharged from further performance and moneys paid may be restored to the party who paid them…
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)
3. Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), [2007] 1 SCR 350, 2007 SCC 9
1 One of the most fundamental responsibilities of a government is to ensure the security of its citizens. This may require it to act on information that it cannot disclose and to detain people who threaten national security. Yet in a constitutional democracy, governments must act accountably and in conformity with the Constitution and the rights and liberties it guarantees. These two propositions describe a tension that lies at the heart of modern democratic governance. It is a tension that must be resolved in a way that respects the imperatives both of security and of accountable constitutional governance.
(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)
The most-consulted French-language decision was Sorel-Tracy (Ville de) c. St-Sauveur, 2007 QCCS 3295
[2] Se représentant sans avocat, le propriétaire de l’immeuble, monsieur Gaétan St-Sauveur convient que le cabanon et le garage soient démolis, même si non dangereux, car « ils sont un négatif pour un acheteur ». Par contre, il s’oppose à la démolition du bâtiment résidentiel, parce que les voisins le surveillent et qu’il n’est pas dangereux. Il sollicite surtout un ultime délai pour trouver un acheteur qui lui éviterait de « tout perdre ».
(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.