Articles 2023

There was only one civil decision released by the Court of Appeal this week long enough to summarize. The rest were very short endorsements and criminal decisions.

The Court of Appeal only released civil law decisions this week. Topics covered included whether or not leave to appeal a vesting order made on a receivership sale under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act is required (it is), an ironic case in which a lawyer initially resisted a professional negligence claim for missing a limitation period by arguing the limitation period had been missed (nice try), insurance law and adjournments.

This week’s Court of Appeal decisions covered a range of subjects including contracts, torts, civil procedure, and wills and estates. The two most notable substantive decisions this week were Spence v BMO Trust Co. - can a bequest be voided on public policy grounds because the disappointed heir alleged that the true motivation for being cut out of the will was racism? – and Neuberger v York, a dispute over a $100 million dollar estate.

Cases this week included commercial leasing decisions involving issues such as insurance and allocation of risk, and the commencement of the limitation period for suing for ongoing breaches of covenants. Other topics included the enforceability of a choice of law and forum clause in a financial adviser case, MVA, copyright, and a debtor-creditor case where the debtor succeeded in a claim for intentional interference with economic relations.

The Court of Appeal released a number of civil decisions this week with topics including the conversion of bills of exchange issued by a fraudulent employee and the fictitious and non-existent payee defences under the Bills of Exchange Act that protect banks, conflicts of interest in the solicitor-client relationship, family law, adverse possession and easements and commercial leases.

On January 14th, 2016, in R. v. Rogers Communications, Sproat J. of the Superior Court of Justice issued a very important decision for organizations that find themselves subject to a search warrant or production order seeking personal information in their records about third parties.