This April, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal in Telus Communications Inc. v Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Applying the modern approach to statutory interpretation, the majority held that “transmission line,” as contemplated under sections 43 and 44 of the Telecommunications Act, does not capture 5G network antennas.
In R v. Campbell, 2024 SCC 42 (“Campbell”), the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) weighed in on whether the police had lawful authority to use the cellphone of a drug dealer without a warrant to continue a text message conversation with an alleged drug distributor. In a 6-3 split, the SCC held that while there was a violation of section 8 of the Charter and Rights and Freedoms [“Charter”], the warrantless search of Mr. Campbell was justified under the exigent circumstances exception outlined in section 11(7) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”).
In Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v Cineplex Inc., 2024 Comp Trib 5 [Cineplex], the Competition Tribunal (“Tribunal”) levied penalties of nearly $40 million dollars against Cineplex Inc., finding that Cineplex Inc. made price misrepresentations through its digital ticket purchasing platforms. The decision marks the first contested proceeding involving the recently enacted “drip pricing” deceptive marketing […]
In Owsianik v Equifax Canada Co., 2022 ONCA 813 [Equifax], the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) clarified the scope of the intrusion upon seclusion tort. In dismissing three separate appeals to certify class proceedings, the Court held that negligence leading to a third party committing intrusion upon seclusion does not itself amount to the tort […]
Introduction It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them. – Mark Twain, Following the Equator What does harm to the reputation of a polarizing public figure entail? What is the […]
This case has already been covered in detail by Nicole Daniels here. The case—and that post—focus more on the issue of who should bear liability for the costs of actions undertaken to combat infringement. This post focuses on the underlying reasons the SCC may have had in reaching their decision. Rogers Communications Inc v Voltage […]
On June 28, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada released Google Inc v Equustek Solutions Inc, 2017 SCC 34 [Google] which granted a worldwide interlocutory injunction against Google Inc. (“Google”), ordering it to remove a company’s website from its global search engines. The Court’s decision in Equustek provides new tools to intellectual property owners to […]
Canadian legislation differentiates between “official marks” and “trademarks.” The Trade-marks Act, RSC 1985, c T-13 [TMA] legislates both trademarks and official marks. Any entity which qualifies as a “public authority” may request that the Registrar of Trademarks give public notice of the adoption of a mark by that entity. The process of giving notice does not require an […]
In the case of BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association v British Columbia (AG), 2017 SCC 6, the Supreme Court once again wrestled with the uniquely Canadian issue of limiting election advertising. The appellant was a non-profit from Vancouver named the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association (“the Association”). Its mandate is to […]
On December 6th, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) heard the case of Google v Equustek. The SCC is being tasked with defining the legal obligations of online intermediaries such as Google. In coming up with these definitions, the SCC must also answer difficult questions surrounding the regulation of illegality on the internet – […]