Articles 2025

On September 16, 2024, the Province of Ontario proposed a new regulation under the Planning Act that would authorize the use of pay-on-demand surety bonds (PSB) with prescribed features to secure development-related obligations.

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of November 4, 2024.

Franchise Law is a trap for the unwary lawyer. The consequences of getting it wrong can be significant, not only to the public, the client, and to various individuals related to the client, but also for the lawyer. According to LawPRO’s most recent statistics the average dollar value of a negligence claim against lawyers in franchise matters was approximately five times the claim value in almost every other area of law.

Ontario public school boards may be liable where they fail to reasonably investigate human rights complaints or where their investigations violate privacy rights. School boards can limit their liability by providing clear policies outlining their investigation processes, restricting the collection of information, limiting access to information, and adapting their processes as new information arises. This ensures that complaints are reasonably addressed and privacy rights are respected.

The Supreme Court of Canada recently held that Ontario public school boards are “inherently governmental” and thus subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”). As a result, the Court overturned an arbitrator’s decision regarding discipline imposed on two teachers because the arbitrator failed to conduct a Charter analysis. This case summary provides a brief overview and analysis of the decision, including the implications for school boards.

Following are our summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of October 28, 2024. This was a fairly busy week.

In October 2024, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in Mathur v Ontario, an ongoing youth-led climate case. The Court found that the Province voluntarily assumed a positive statutory obligation to combat climate change, meaning its target and plan need to be Charter compliant. Although the Court allowed the appeal, it declined to decide the application and instead remitted the matter for a new hearing before the same or another justice of the Superior Court.