Articles 2022

There were not many substantive decisions. Perhaps the most interesting was Am-Stat Corporation v Ontario. Other topics covered this week included costs in the family law and class action contexts, private and public interest standing in the insurance/MVA context, and wrongful dismissal in the doctor’s hospital privileges context.

Following are the summaries for this week’s civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. All the decisions this week were procedural in nature. One of those was yet another decision in Fontaine v Canada, the Residential School Settlement case, with more appellate decisions apparently to come in that matter.

Plaintiffs' counsel be aware: the litigation finger test can assist in cases of misdescription or misnomer of a party, allowing the plaintiff to correct their mistake and "add" the intended person as a party even after the expiration of the limitation period.

Following are the summaries for this week’s civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. In Shah v LG Chem Ltd, the Court of Appeal certified a class action for claims of conspiracy at common law and conspiracy to price fix under the Competition Act, in relation to lithium-ion batteries. The Court determined that the concept of “indeterminate liability” in negligence law should not be imported into the analysis of common conspiracy or Competition Act claims.

In Wang v Canada, the Court of Appeal held that habeas corpus applies not only to detention in prison, but in any situation where the applicant’s liberty is curtailed, such as house arrest. Other topics included a professional negligence claim against a lawyer, a jurisdictional dispute in respect of an oppression claim, a summary judgment for fraud, and an appeal of a jury’s damage award in an MVA trial.

There were two wrongful dismissal cases this week. One was brought by a physician against Sick Kids Hospital. The second involved the breach of fiduciary duty of a senior officer of a public company who was found to have been self-dealing. Other topics included spousal support and dismissal for delay.

As everyone will have heard by now, the Court of Appeal stayed Justice Belobaba’s decision in Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General). Other topics this week included notice of termination in the context of a mass termination of employees, municipal liability for non-repair of a highway (two decisions), administrative law in the WSIB context, and causation in the medmal context.

Topics include trespass by an owner’s invitees over land that was subject to a right of way granted by the owner to the plaintiff, stay pending appeal in the context of the ongoing administration of the residential schools settlement, appealing a judgment for breach of a commercial lease on the basis of fresh evidence, mental distress damages for negligence claims, jurisdiction and attornment in a custody dispute, and abuse of process in the context of requesting a reconsideration of an appeal.

An explanation of the benefits of Document Management Software in small- to-medium-sized litigation firms.

In Nasr Hospitality Services Inc. v Intact Insurance, another decision as to the meaning of “appropriate means” under subsection 5(a)(iv) of the Limitations Act, 2002, the Court reiterated that settlement negotiations do not toll the limitation period. Other topics included certification of a class action, the duty of care of auditors to shareholders, a useful refresher on basic principles of the law of evidence, guardianship application and appellate jurisdiction.