Articles

In its first decision of the year, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that arbitration clauses in Uber’s contracts with its drivers were void, and that a proposed class action against Uber could proceed.

One of the more interesting tax developments of 2018 was surely the jurisprudence considering whether a taxpayer has realized a tax benefit, one of three requirements for the application of the general anti-avoidance rule. The existence of a tax benefit had only infrequently been disputed by taxpayers, until several of taxpayers disputed it in 2018.

A recent judgement of the Federal Court highlights the need for taxpayers to consider solicitor-client privilege carefully when creating documents that record uncertain tax positions, and limits the applicability of BP Canada, which held that the Minister of National Revenue was not entitled to have access to Tax Accrual Working Papers without restriction.

In this article, the authors discuss the proposed measures introduced in the 2018 Fall Economic Statement that will allow businesses to accelerate the tax depreciation of certain capital investments.

Assistant Crown Attorney Benjamin Janzen provides helpful tips for counsel assisting individuals with guilty pleas to provincial offences.

Crown Attorney Erin Pancer provides an overview of the Dark Web and the role of cryptocurrency in facilitating the purchase of drugs and firearms.

Lisa Jørgensen provides a helpful refresher on the law of voluntariness, with a focus on recent Court of Appeal and Superior Court jurisprudence.

Lynda Morgan summarizes the Supreme Court of Canada's recent significant judgment in R. v. Reeves, respecting the effect of the consent of a co-owner or third party to the police seizure of a computer.

There were only two substantive civil decisions of the Court of Appeal this week. Most notably, in Heller v Uber Technologies Inc., the Court revived a proposed class action by Uber drivers against Uber. Justice Perrell had stayed the class proceeding on jurisdictional grounds in favour of Uber’s arbitration clause requiring all disputes to be arbitrated in the Netherlands. The Court determined that the arbitration clause was invalid and unenforceable.

In PQ Licensing S.A. v. LPQ Central Canada Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal considered whether the mandatory mediation process prescribed by a franchise agreement impacted the limitation period applicable to a franchisee’s rescission claim.  The Court found that the franchisee’s claim for rescission was not barred even though the franchisee had delivered its notice of rescission nearly a decade prior.