On October 1st, 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal released its judgment in Sutts, Strosberg LLP v. Atlas Cold Storage Holdings Inc., 2009 ONCA 690. The significance of this case lies in its status as one of the few securities class actions in Canada. One counsel submitted that this “was the third largest securities class […]
Over the past two decades, academics and judges have debated the issue of awarding damages for violations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the absence of mala fides. It took the threat of a dessert ambush to get the matter to the SCC. Back in June, leave to appeal was granted for […]
On June 12, 2009, the Alberta Court of Appeal released its much-awaited insurance cap decision in Morrow v. Zhang, 2009 ABCA 215. In 2004, the province of Alberta passed legislation, the Minor Injury Regulation, AR 123/2004 (MIR), which imposed a $4,000 cap on non-pecuniary damages for “minor injuries” as defined under the MIR. The Alberta […]
On June 27, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada released its long awaited decision in Honda v. Keays, 2008 SCC 39. The trial and appeal decisions were controversial enough that many were expecting the Court to provide significant guidance on how to lawfully terminate employees with “invisible” disabilities. Instead, in a very unexpected decision, the […]
“It is tragic but true that people working with the vulnerable sometimes abuse their positions and commit wrongs against the very people they are engaged to help.” In Evans v Sproule, 2008 CanLII 58428 (ONSC), Chapnik J. begins by quoting from the decision of McLachlin J. (as she was then) in Bazley v Curry, [1999] […]
On October 23, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada announced that it granted leave to appeal to an unusual B.C. case that, despite a recognized need for refinement, is unlikely to significantly clarify the law of fiduciary duty. Perez v Galambos, 2008 BCCA 91 presents a fact scenario in which the relationship between the parties suffers […]
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Keays v. Honda Canada, 2008 SCC 39, (summarized by Solomon Lam here) was a major victory for employers everywhere. In reducing both aggravated and punitive damages to zero, the Supreme Court of Canada has effectively deemed that Honda's conduct, while harmful, was not egregiously harmful. It is worth remembering […]
Last Friday the Supreme Court handed down its ruling on Honda v. Kevin Keays, 2008 SCC 39. Considered a watershed employment law case, Keays had no less than nine intervenors and has been the subject of much attention in both the legal community and the media. TheCourt.ca contributor Michael Lynk provided a useful analysis of […]
This post was originally published on the blog maintained by the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta, which can be found here. It is reproduced at TheCourt.ca with permission. A little over a week ago, the Supreme Court of Canada pronounced in Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd., 2008 SCC 27. The facts […]
If there was any opportunity for the Supreme Court to revise some of the basic tort rules, it was remised in Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd, 2008 SCC 27. Perhaps the case turned out as it did because psychological harm is not truly synonymous with physical harm despite the judges’ proclamations (in para 8). […]