On January 6, 2015, the British Columbia Court of Appeal (“BCCA”) delivered a judgment upholding a trial judge’s decision to consider human sperm to be “property” for the purposes of provincial legislation regulating the storage of goods. Lam v University of British Columbia, 2015 BCCA 2, touches on the bioethics of whether human reproductive tissues […]
The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) recently denied leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario (“ONCA”) in R v Szostak, 2014 ONCA 15. In this case Mr. Szostak appealed from his sentence of 6 years imprisonment, while the Crown appealed the decision of the trial judge to not impose […]
While there is no question that Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s (“CIC”) process for sponsoring parents to come to Canada treats applicants differently on the basis of family status, it remains to be seen if this differential treatment is justified. On February 3, 2015, the Federal Court of Appeal found that the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s […]
The British Columbia Court of Appeal ("BCCA") case KBA Canada, Inc v Supreme Graphics Limited, 2014 BCCA 117, was released this past March. The judgment reversed the decision of the lower court, with part of the courts’ analysis revealing contrasting opinions on the role of equity in determining the priority of a security interest that […]
The latest chapter in the dispute between lawyer Joseph Groia and the Law Society of Upper Canada (“LSUC”) has come to a close. Earlier this month, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Groia’s appeal from an LSUC decision that found he had engaged in unprofessional conduct during a more than decade-old trial. While Joseph […]
Lawyers and experts can and should work together to prepare expert reports, declared the Ontario Court of Appeal ("ONCA") in a recent unanimous decision. In late January, ONCA ruled in Moore v Getahun, 2015 ONCA 55, that allowing lawyers and experts to discuss the contents of expert reports while those reports are being prepared is […]
This is the second part of a three-part series discussing the Supreme Court of Canada’s paramount decision in Carter v Canada (Attorney General). Part I has addressed the notion that stare decisis is not a straitjacket that condemns the law to stasis. Part II will address the changes that the Carter decision will have on […]
This is the first part of a three-part series discussing the Supreme Court of Canada’s paramount decision in Carter v Canada (Attorney General). Part I will address stare decisis. Part II will address the changes that the Carter decision will have on our understanding and interpretation of s. 7 of the Charter. Part I On […]
Last month, in Spence v BMO Trust Company, 2015 ONSC 615 [Spence], the Ontario Superior Court of Justice set aside a will for being contrary to public policy, as the testator’s motivation for excluding one his daughters from his will was racially motivated.
On January 16, 2015, the Ontario Superior Court ("ONSC") in Sarnia released its decision in Steadman v Lambton (City), 2015 ONSC 101 [Steadman]. The decision awarded over $107,000 to Evelyn and Joseph Steadman, who sued the County of Lambton for 15 years of crop losses and a drop in property value, which was caused by the […]