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 de Grood, 2016 ABQB 294

[129] Each of the three experts concludes that Mr. de Grood did appreciate the nature and quality of his acts in stabbing his victims but did not know, or appreciate, that his behaviour was morally wrong as he was acting under a delusion that he was being threatened at the time. Having reviewed all . . . [more]

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. Canada (Attorney General) v E.F., 2016 ABCA 155

[28] Canada acknowledges that nowhere in paragraph 127 is there a reference, express or otherwise, to the “illness, condition or disability” of the applicant being terminal, nor to the applicant being at or near the end of life. A legislative background document published by the Canadian government and provided to the court by . . . [more]

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. Ursa Ventures Ltd v Edmonton (City), 2016 ABCA 135

[32] It is clear that the chambers judge considered this affidavit of records in the context of this lawsuit. He looked at its nature (a sworn affidavit) and the allegations in the pleadings. He was aware of the timing of the affidavit (within weeks of the three-year time limit). He balanced these . . . [more]

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. Malton v Attia, 2016 ABCA 130

[83] In this case, the numerous unjustified criticisms of and adverse findings against the appellants and their counsel, already discussed in these reasons, raise a concern that the trial judge was predisposed against the appellants. Taken individually, the various adverse findings and criticisms would not be able to withstand appellate review, but they would not . . . [more]

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. Pritchard v. Van Nes, 2016 BCSC 686

[65] I find Mr. Pritchard has proven that Ms. Van Nes’ initial Facebook posts and her subsequent replies to her “friends”’ comments were defamatory, in that they tended to lower the plaintiff’s reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person. The ordinary and natural meaning of Van Nes’ comments unequivocally described Mr. Pritchard as . . . [more]

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. Gauthier v Starr, 2016 ABQB 213

[35] Gauthier’s initial and Amended Statement of Claim arguably could be the product of a poorly informed lay litigant, though taking the step of modifying the Rules Form 10 template Statement of Claim to make this an action where Gauthier is “Prosecutor”, and the Defendants are “Wrongdoers”, is a rather implausible innocent civil litigation error. . . . [more]

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. Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Development), 2016 SCC 12

[1] As the curtain opens wider and wider on the history of Canada’s relationship with its Indigenous peoples, inequities are increasingly revealed and remedies urgently sought. Many revelations have resulted in good faith policy and legislative responses, but the list of disadvantages remains robust. This case represents another chapter in . . . [more]

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. Mou v. MHPM Project Leaders, 2016 HRTO 327

[21] I also find the applicant’s miscarriage is a disability. I acknowledge that a miscarriage may be covered under the ground of sex or as an intersection of sex and disability. It also is not a common ailment, and it is certainly not transitory. It is clear from the applicant’s testimony that she . . . [more]

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. Economical Mutual Insurance Company v. Caughy, 2016 ONCA 226

[17] Does parking a vehicle constitute the type of aberrant use contemplated by the Supreme Court in Citadel? In my view, it does not. The examples cited by Binnie J. were limited to circumstances in which a vehicle is not being used as a vehicle but for some other purpose. Parking a . . . [more]

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. Ghomeshi, 2016 ONCJ 155

[128] I have very deliberately considered the evidence relating to each of the charges separately. Each complainant in this case had a different and unique experience with Mr. Ghomeshi. However, there are certain common aspects to their cases. Each had some involvement in the arts and entertainment world, which brought them into contact with the . . . [more]

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. Murillo v Turnbull, 2016 ONSC 1906

[26] Taking on a personal injury file on a contingent fee basis is a gamble. The law firm puts up their own money to fund disbursements, and carries their work in progress on their books unbilled, in the expectation that they will ultimately reap a generous reward when the case is concluded by a settlement . . . [more]

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. Jackson v Mayerle, 2016 ONSC 1556

8. These are nice, average people. Of modest means (now considerably more modest). They drive old cars and probably pinch pennies shopping at Costco.

9. And yet somehow, between them, they spent more than half a million dollars on lawyers “to have a judge tell us something we could arrange ourselves.”

(Check for commentary . . . [more]