Posts Tagged ‘Ontario Superior Court of Justice’

Tenants now more vulnerable than ever – eviction at the Superior Court of Justice

August 24th, 2022 by Hunter Stone

The Landlord and Tenant Board (the LTB) is governed by the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O (the RTA), C.17, and hears matters brought by landlords and tenants regarding the rental property.

In March 2020, the world‑wide COVID‑19 pandemic hit the LTB like a ton of bricks, causing extreme backlog at the tribunal. The LTB responded by adopting an electronic approach to filing materials and hearing matters, eliminating in person hearings entirely. This electronic approach was an attempt to deliver service in a time conscious manner. Despite these efforts, the LTB was and is still experiencing backlog due to the pandemic, leaving many landlords feeling frustrated about the delayed hearing process and issuance of orders. With few avenues to turn to, landlords are utilizing the Superior Court of Justice (the Superior Court) to evict their tenants living in condo units. Continue reading “Tenants now more vulnerable than ever – eviction at the Superior Court of Justice”

Court order gives Mi’kmaw fishers temporary protections, but what are the next steps?

October 29th, 2020 by Safia Lakhani

This article was first published on rabble.ca.

This publication and others have written about the shocking acts of violence and intimidation toward Mi’kmaw lobster fishers in Nova Scotia following the inauguration of a fishery in St. Mary’s Bay by the Sipekne’katik First Nation in September 2020. Continue reading “Court order gives Mi’kmaw fishers temporary protections, but what are the next steps?”

Think your waiver has you covered? It might not.

May 18th, 2018 by Elliot Fonarev

Chances are your organization has dealt with waivers if your services have the potential to create injury or liability to your clients or customers – for example, if you operate sports facilities or provide access to a physical space with potential hazards. If so, a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on the topic of waivers may interest you. It highlights that documents that release liability should be drafted very specifically to make it clear which legal rights are being waived.

Continue reading “Think your waiver has you covered? It might not.”

Canadian mining company may be held liable for human rights abuses committed abroad by its foreign subsidiaries

August 13th, 2013 by Priya Sarin

On July 22, 2013, Justice Brown of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released her decision on whether or not related lawsuits against three mining companies, Hudbay Minerals Inc. (“Hudbay”), HMI Nickel Inc. (“HMI”) and Compañía Guatemalteca de Níquel S.A. (“CGN”), would be permitted to proceed (the “Hudbay Actions”). The defendants brought preliminary motions in March of this year to strike each of the claims on the basis that they disclosed no reasonable cause of action. As discussed below, Justice Brown quite rightly dismissed all three of the defendants’ motions. This is a groundbreaking decision because it will result in the first time that an action is litigated in Canada on the question of whether a Canadian parent company (i.e. Hudbay) can be held liable for the actions of its subsidiaries abroad (i.e. CGN and HMI) and, moreover, it recognizes that such a finding is in fact possible.

Read the rest of this post on rabble.ca

Shark Fin Ban Case: Does Biodiversity Have Anything to Do With Social and Civic “Well-Being”?

April 2nd, 2013 by Laura Bowman

In November 2012 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice held that Toronto’s shark fin by-law was ultra vires.

Eng v. Toronto (City) was an application seeking a declaration that By-law No. 12347-2011 of the City of Toronto (Shark fin by-law) was ultra vires and of no force and effect. The by-law provides, in section 3, that “no person shall possess, sell or consume shark fin or shark fin food products within the city of Toronto”. The by-law was passed by a vote of 38-4 at council. The applicants argued that the shark fin by-law’s purpose was directed against the extinction of sharks and lacked a proper municipal purpose. The court agreed that this environmental threat was a purpose of the ban on shark fin food products as it was “a theme that persists in the public record of the proposed ban” and “environmental well-being of the City” was mentioned the preamble.

The applicants submitted that the City was the “wrong level of government” for the by-law and that there was no identifiable environmental benefit to the city. The court rejected the first argument and accepted the second.

Read more in the Ontario Bar Association’s Envronews (pdf) »