Congratulations to Blaneys’ very own Roderick Winsor and Steven Kelly for the result obtained in N.S. v. Ukraine International Airlines PJSC. These actions were brought by the families of those who died in the shootdown of the UIA Flight PS752 by Iran following the American assassination of General Soleimani, a key figure in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. UIA defended its decision to fly, arguing that its decision was the same as other airlines operating in the region, was permitted by the relevant governments, and that the shoot down was not foreseeable. The Court dismissed the appeal from the detailed trial decision in favour of the plaintiffs. It concluded that Iran was a Conflict Zone and thus the risk assessment procedures in the International Civil Aviation Organization’s ICAO 10084 ought to have been followed. UIA’s Risk Assessment was negligent, resulting in the flight taking off notwithstanding the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran. The Court upheld the trial judge’s findings on all key issues, dismissing UIA’s arguments. The Court also denied leave to appeal costs, as there was no error in the trial judge’s discretionary costs assessment.
In Fair Voting v. Canada (Attorney General), the appellants challenged the constitutionality of the federal electoral system under the Canada Elections Act, arguing it violated the rights to vote and equality under the Charter. The Court found that while the single-member plurality system may have its flaws, it did not infringe on the right to meaningful participation or equality, as the Charter does not guarantee proportional representation or demographic parity in Parliament. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court affirming that the current electoral system is constitutional and does not violate Charter rights.
In Meldazy v. Nassar, the Court upheld a jury award of over $1.5 million in damages to the respondent who was injured in a motor vehicle accident involving a TTC bus. The appellants, WM and the TTC, challenged the trial judge’s refusal to put their proposed jury questions on causation and apportionment of damages to the jury, as well as the jury instructions and the handling of expert evidence on past income loss. The Court found that the jury was properly instructed and that the appellants’ proposed questions were unnecessarily complex and potentially confusing. The appeal was dismissed, and the damages award was upheld.
In YG Limited Partnership and YSL Residences Inc. (Re), the Court upheld a decision reversing a proposal trustee’s decision to disallow the breach of contract claim of a former executive in bankruptcy proceedings. The proposal trustee had initially disallowed the claim as an “equity claim” under the BIA and as being contingent. The Court upheld the appeal judge’s decision to allow the executive’s claim, finding that the claim was one for unliquidated damages for breach of an employment contract, and not tied to an ownership interest in the corporation. The trustee and the affected limited partners put forward arguments on priority, enforceability, and procedural issues – all of which were rejected by the Court.
In Ottawa Community Housing Corporation v. Sloan Valve Company, the appellant sought to appeal the striking out of an implied warranty claim and a negligence claim pursuant to r.21 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. The appeal was dismissed as the Court found that the defects in the pleadings could not be cured with leave to amend.