Articles 2023

I would like to congratulate our very own Roger Horst and Rafal Szymanski on successfully representing the respondent in Correct Building Corporation v. Lehman. The Court dismissed the appeal against our client and granted our client’s cross-appeal, resulting in a dismissal of all claims against our client by way of summary judgment.

Following are summaries of this week’s civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, including Ontario Inc. v. Maple Leafs Foods Inc., in which the Court decided Maple Leafs Foods did not have a duty not to harm the reputation or profits of Mr. Sub franchisees who sold Maple Leaf meats; and, on the Criminal Law front, the Court's decision in R. v. Forcillo, in which the appeal from the conviction of the constable for attempted murder was dismissed.

Topics covered this week included two procedural fairness decisions (one relating to interpreting a contract in a way neither party argued, the other relating to the effect of a lengthy adjournment mid-trial), repair and storage liens in the automobile insurance context, the tort of conversion, as well as several short procedural decisions.

In Wallbridge v. Brunning, the Court of Appeal held that whether a law firm can be vicariously liable for defamatory statements made by a lawyer who practices “in association” with it, is an issue of general importance that should be determined at a trial and not on a motion for summary judgment. Other topics covered this week included several wills and estates matters, wrongful dismissal, family law (custody and abduction), limitation periods and some procedural matters.

Topics covered this week included franchise law and rescission, liability for wrongful patent enforcement, the duty to defend in the MVA context, family law (custody and access and breach of court orders), securities class actions, and mortgage enforcement. John Polyzogopoulos

“Like a forest fire in this era of climate change, costs in class proceedings have gotten out of control.” These were the opening words of Justice Perell in his recent costs decision following a successful defence motion to stay the class proceedings in Heller v Uber Technologies Inc, 2018 ONSC 1690.

The intersection of intellectual property law and competition law is an area that gains greater significance with each passing year. Much of the focus in this area recently has been on the appropriate scope of action to take by regulators. Also important, but attracting less attention, is the application of common law doctrines against contracts in restraint of trade to agreements that are based on the enforcement of intellectual property rights.

This article considers the Ontario Court of Appeal's recent decision in Huang v. Fraser Hillary's Limited, 2018 ONCA 277, in which the court denied Ecojustice leave to intervene in an appeal.

On January 14, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada denied Precision Plating Ltd.’s (“Precision Plating”) application for leave to appeal the British Columbia Court of Appeal’s (“BCCA”) decision in Precision Plating Ltd. v. Axa Pacific Insurance Co., (“Precision Plating v Axa”).

The civil decisions released by the Court of Appeal this week dealt with issues such as enforcement of terms of settlement, discoverability, the authority of a lawyer to act on behalf of an incapacitated client and others.