Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
More Annotations
A complete backup of https://npo-echelon.ru
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://wageningenur.nl
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://acidigital.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://wplang.org
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://kenzoparfums.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://mchsrf.ru
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://freejobalertdaily.in
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://tradeallcrypto.best
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://celtic-lyrics.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://bookofraonlinegame.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://einzelhandel.de
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of https://2foodtrippers.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
Favourite Annotations
A complete backup of easychoicetime.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of taraftarium24.website
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of simply-me-kish.myshopify.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of studying-in-canada.org
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of carriebrasil.com.br
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of cloudhunterco.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
A complete backup of bananaumbrella.tmall.com
Are you over 18 and want to see adult content?
Text
)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: CRIMINAL LAW; SEXUAL ASSAULT BY YOUNG PERSON The SCC (8:1, with the main reasons by three judges, separate concurring reasons by four judges, a separate set of reasons by one judge, and one judge in dissent) dismissed the appeal. Justice Abella (with whom Justices Karakatsanis and Martin concurred) wrote as follows (at paras. 1-4, 114-120): “This is an appeal by a youngperson from a
CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the SCC TODAY: CONTRACTS; DUTY TO EXERCISE CONTRACTUAL The SCC (9:0, with separate joint concurring reasons) dismissed the appeal. Justice Kasirer wrote as follows (at paras. 3-7, 111-113): “The problem in this case is not so much whether the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith exists, but on what basis it exists and according to what standard its breach can be madeout.
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: CRIMINAL LAW; SEXUAL ASSAULT BY YOUNG PERSON The SCC (8:1, with the main reasons by three judges, separate concurring reasons by four judges, a separate set of reasons by one judge, and one judge in dissent) dismissed the appeal. Justice Abella (with whom Justices Karakatsanis and Martin concurred) wrote as follows (at paras. 1-4, 114-120): “This is an appeal by a youngperson from a
CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the SCC TODAY: CONTRACTS; DUTY TO EXERCISE CONTRACTUAL The SCC (9:0, with separate joint concurring reasons) dismissed the appeal. Justice Kasirer wrote as follows (at paras. 3-7, 111-113): “The problem in this case is not so much whether the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith exists, but on what basis it exists and according to what standard its breach can be madeout.
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in TEST FOR LIMITING PUBLIC ACCESS TO ESTATE FILES On Friday, June 11, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in Estate of Bernard Sherman and the Trustees of the Estate, et al. v. Kevin Donovan, et al. At issue is the test for limiting public access to court records. SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
SCC TODAY: 4 LEAVES GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SCC TODAY: CONTRACTS; DUTY TO EXERCISE CONTRACTUAL The SCC (9:0, with separate joint concurring reasons) dismissed the appeal. Justice Kasirer wrote as follows (at paras. 3-7, 111-113): “The problem in this case is not so much whether the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith exists, but on what basis it exists and according to what standard its breach can be madeout.
SCC TODAY: 9 LEAVES DISMISSED The Supreme Court of Canada dismisses 9 leaves to appeal. Dismissed (9) Charter: s. 15; Income Assistance . Directer, St. Boniface/St. Vital v. Stadler, 2020 MBCA 46 (39269) The Assistance Regulation, s. 12.1(2), made under The Manitoba Assistance Act required Applicants for income assistance “obtain the maximum amount of compensation, benefits or contribution to support and SCC TODAY: 2 LEAVES GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (2) Civil Procedure: Advance Costs Anderson v. Alberta (Attorney General), 2020 ABCA 238 (39323) The Applicant Beaver Lake Cree Nation filed a claim against Alberta and Canada in 2008, seeking various declarations of rights, injunctions, and damages for the cumulative effects of resource developments allowed on their traditional lands protected by Treaty 6. RES GESTAE (SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCES) HEARSAY EXCEPTION Without the complainant’s viva voce testimony or a statement, the Crown sought to adduce the complainant’s utterances to the police under the principled exception to the hearsay rule as set out in R v Khan, 1990 CanLII 77 (SCC). The Trial Judge declines on the basis there was no “necessity” (i.e. no evidence the complainant hadbeen
HOW DOES THE DOCTRINE OF ABUSE OF PROCESS OPERATE IN an abuse of process. The Motion Judge determines the Appellant could have raised the issue in response to an oppression application initiated by his daughter. That application results in an order that, inter alia, the Appellant be removed as trustee of the family trust. The Court of Appeal dismisses the Appellant’s appeal; finds no basisto
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant CAN YOU APPEAL A LEAVE TO APPEAL DECISION? The Court (single judge, Pfuetzner J.A.) focused the analysis on the third criterion, arguable grounds of appeal. For the Court of Appeal, the principle that “no appeal generally lies from a decision denying or granting leave to appeal” posed a significant hurdle. (See para. 6). That being said, the Court noted an “exception to the HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES (WHERE LEAVE IS REQUIRED) This chart is not legal advice. Deadlines may be subject to exceptionsnot noted above.
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES (WHERE LEAVE IS REQUIRED) This chart is not legal advice. Deadlines may be subject to exceptionsnot noted above.
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
TEST FOR LIMITING PUBLIC ACCESS TO ESTATE FILES On Friday, June 11, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in Estate of Bernard Sherman and the Trustees of the Estate, et al. v. Kevin Donovan, et al. At issue is the test for limiting public access to court records. TEAM – SUPREME ADVOCACY We are a team of lawyers dedicated to helping clients put their strongest arguments forward at the appeal stage. We work either directly with clients or with their existing counsel to ensure persuasive written and oral advocacy. Fresh look. It’s easy to be too close to a file. We bring a fresh appellate perspective to a case. Augment your appeal. CONTACT – SUPREME ADVOCACY Supreme Advocacy LLP. 340 Gilmour St., Suite 100 Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax: 613-695-8580 SCC TODAY: 4 LEAVES GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SCC TODAY: CONTRACTS; DUTY TO EXERCISE CONTRACTUAL The SCC (9:0, with separate joint concurring reasons) dismissed the appeal. Justice Kasirer wrote as follows (at paras. 3-7, 111-113): “The problem in this case is not so much whether the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith exists, but on what basis it exists and according to what standard its breach can be madeout.
SCC TODAY: CRIMINAL LAW; SEXUAL ASSAULT BY YOUNG PERSON The SCC (8:1, with the main reasons by three judges, separate concurring reasons by four judges, a separate set of reasons by one judge, and one judge in dissent) dismissed the appeal. Justice Abella (with whom Justices Karakatsanis and Martin concurred) wrote as follows (at paras. 1-4, 114-120): “This is an appeal by a youngperson from a
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant HOW DOES THE DOCTRINE OF ABUSE OF PROCESS OPERATE IN an abuse of process. The Motion Judge determines the Appellant could have raised the issue in response to an oppression application initiated by his daughter. That application results in an order that, inter alia, the Appellant be removed as trustee of the family trust. The Court of Appeal dismisses the Appellant’s appeal; finds no basisto
MARIE-FRANCE MAJOR
Marie-France Major is a partner in the firm. She drafts materials and provides advice and agency services to clients regarding applications, responses, factums and motions for appeals before the Supreme Court of Canada. Marie-France draws on her Doctor of Juridical Science from the University of California at Berkeley and years of experience as HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES (WHERE LEAVE IS REQUIRED) This chart is not legal advice. Deadlines may be subject to exceptionsnot noted above.
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES (WHERE LEAVE IS REQUIRED) This chart is not legal advice. Deadlines may be subject to exceptionsnot noted above.
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
TEST FOR LIMITING PUBLIC ACCESS TO ESTATE FILES On Friday, June 11, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in Estate of Bernard Sherman and the Trustees of the Estate, et al. v. Kevin Donovan, et al. At issue is the test for limiting public access to court records. TEAM – SUPREME ADVOCACY We are a team of lawyers dedicated to helping clients put their strongest arguments forward at the appeal stage. We work either directly with clients or with their existing counsel to ensure persuasive written and oral advocacy. Fresh look. It’s easy to be too close to a file. We bring a fresh appellate perspective to a case. Augment your appeal. CONTACT – SUPREME ADVOCACY Supreme Advocacy LLP. 340 Gilmour St., Suite 100 Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax: 613-695-8580 SCC TODAY: 4 LEAVES GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SCC TODAY: CONTRACTS; DUTY TO EXERCISE CONTRACTUAL The SCC (9:0, with separate joint concurring reasons) dismissed the appeal. Justice Kasirer wrote as follows (at paras. 3-7, 111-113): “The problem in this case is not so much whether the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith exists, but on what basis it exists and according to what standard its breach can be madeout.
SCC TODAY: CRIMINAL LAW; SEXUAL ASSAULT BY YOUNG PERSON The SCC (8:1, with the main reasons by three judges, separate concurring reasons by four judges, a separate set of reasons by one judge, and one judge in dissent) dismissed the appeal. Justice Abella (with whom Justices Karakatsanis and Martin concurred) wrote as follows (at paras. 1-4, 114-120): “This is an appeal by a youngperson from a
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant HOW DOES THE DOCTRINE OF ABUSE OF PROCESS OPERATE IN an abuse of process. The Motion Judge determines the Appellant could have raised the issue in response to an oppression application initiated by his daughter. That application results in an order that, inter alia, the Appellant be removed as trustee of the family trust. The Court of Appeal dismisses the Appellant’s appeal; finds no basisto
MARIE-FRANCE MAJOR
Marie-France Major is a partner in the firm. She drafts materials and provides advice and agency services to clients regarding applications, responses, factums and motions for appeals before the Supreme Court of Canada. Marie-France draws on her Doctor of Juridical Science from the University of California at Berkeley and years of experience as HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY SCC Weekly. The original newsletter since the mid-‘90s. What started as a fax to a few friends and colleagues has grown to an email that reaches lawyers around CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals inEUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Strategic Legal Writing for Students with Writing Assignments – Lakehead University, Oct 9, 2019 SCC Cases of Interest to the Personal Injury Bar – the last 18 months – Will Davidson LLP – Experts at Trial: How to Maximize (or Minimize) Their Effectiveness, Sept 25, 2019 Expert Evidence Post: Saadati v.Moorhead – Will Davidson LLP – Experts at Trial: How to Maximize (or Minimize SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES (WHERE LEAVE IS REQUIRED) This chart is not legal advice. Deadlines may be subject to exceptionsnot noted above.
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
HOME – SUPREME ADVOCACYNEWSLETTERSERVICESTEAMBLOGCONTACTENGLISH)DIRECTIONSWEBSITE
On Friday, May 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in MédiaQMI inc. c. Magdi Kamel, et al. At issue is the right of a party to remove exhibits from the court record and the ability of a media company to prevent a party from doing so based on the open court principle. NEWSLETTER – SUPREME ADVOCACY This weekly newsletter delivers to your inbox summaries of the latest Supreme Court of Canada decisions the morning they are released (usually Thursday or Friday). We cover both appeals and leaves to appeal so you can track what the law is and where it’s headed. Our topical headings allow for quick-scanning, so if you’re litigating SCC TODAY: 1 LEAVE GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED Granted (1) Criminal Law: Constitutionality Re Parole Ineligibility Attorney General of Québec and Her Majesty the Queen v. Bisonette, 2020 QCCA 1585 (39544) On the evening of January 29, 2017, the Respondent, Mr. Bissonnette, who was 27 years old at the time, left home with two firearms and ammunition and headed to the Great Mosqueof Québec.
CLASS ACTIONS: SEQUENCING APPLICATIONS 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOUND TO BE ENTIRELY In this case, the Court of Appeal flatly disagreed with the conclusion reached by the Motion Judge: “summary judgment was an entirely inappropriate avenue”. (See para. 12). For the Court of Appeal, the evidentiary record was “far from ideal” – the only evidence to consider being “photographs of the espondent, materials from the WHEN'S A MUNICIPALITY AN EMPLOYER UNDER OSHA? Case: Ontario (Labour) v.Sudbury (City), 2021 ONCA 252 (CanLII) Keywords: Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1; “employer” Synopsis: A woman is struck and killed by a road grader performing repairs in downtown Sudbury. The grader is driven by an employee of Interpaving Limited, a company contracted to complete road repairs by the City of Sudbury.EUGENE MEEHAN, Q.C.
Eugene Meehan, Q.C. – Supreme Advocacy. ; Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Having been both a professor and Executive Legal Officer to Chief Justice Lamer, Eugene serves his clients with a unique blend of legal knowledge and practical experience. He’s most at ease strategizing for an appeal or on his feet arguing before multiple judges. INDEPENDENT ELECTRICITY SYSTEM OPERATOR V. NATIONAL STEEL Whether a court is required to look beyond legislation in determining whether a levy is a regulatory charge or tax — Whether the delegation of authority from the legislature to a subordinate entity to collect a levy, without delegating any discretionary powers, is contrary to s. 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867 — Whether the incorporation of environmental and social policy goals in SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DEADLINES (WHERE LEAVE IS REQUIRED) This chart is not legal advice. Deadlines may be subject to exceptionsnot noted above.
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the Appellant TEST FOR LIMITING PUBLIC ACCESS TO ESTATE FILES On Friday, June 11, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in Estate of Bernard Sherman and the Trustees of the Estate, et al. v. Kevin Donovan, et al. At issue is the test for limiting public access to court records. SCC TODAY: 4 LEAVES GRANTED, 6 DISMISSED 340 Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax:613-695-8580
CONTACT – SUPREME ADVOCACY Supreme Advocacy LLP. 340 Gilmour St., Suite 100 Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel: 613-695-8855 Fax: 613-695-8580 SCC TODAY: CONTRACTS; DUTY TO EXERCISE CONTRACTUAL The SCC (9:0, with separate joint concurring reasons) dismissed the appeal. Justice Kasirer wrote as follows (at paras. 3-7, 111-113): “The problem in this case is not so much whether the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith exists, but on what basis it exists and according to what standard its breach can be madeout.
SCC TODAY: CRIMINAL LAW; SEXUAL ASSAULT BY YOUNG PERSON The SCC (8:1, with the main reasons by three judges, separate concurring reasons by four judges, a separate set of reasons by one judge, and one judge in dissent) dismissed the appeal. Justice Abella (with whom Justices Karakatsanis and Martin concurred) wrote as follows (at paras. 1-4, 114-120): “This is an appeal by a youngperson from a
SCC TODAY: CRIMINAL LAW; DELAY The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s order.”. The SCC (9:0) dismissed the appeal. “There is no doubt that the delay in this case far exceeded the 30-month presumptive ceiling established in Jordan. With respect to this calculation, the Crown urges us to adopt the dissenting reasons of Gagnon J.A. in the Court of Appeal. RES GESTAE (SPONTANEOUS UTTERANCES) HEARSAY EXCEPTION Without the complainant’s viva voce testimony or a statement, the Crown sought to adduce the complainant’s utterances to the police under the principled exception to the hearsay rule as set out in R v Khan, 1990 CanLII 77 (SCC). The Trial Judge declines on the basis there was no “necessity” (i.e. no evidence the complainant hadbeen
HOW DOES THE DOCTRINE OF ABUSE OF PROCESS OPERATE IN an abuse of process. The Motion Judge determines the Appellant could have raised the issue in response to an oppression application initiated by his daughter. That application results in an order that, inter alia, the Appellant be removed as trustee of the family trust. The Court of Appeal dismisses the Appellant’s appeal; finds no basisto
INSURANCE COVERAGE: DRIVING WITHOUT PERMISSION OR A The Appellant – a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver without the permission of the owner – sustains injuries in a motor vehicle accident (“MVA”). The Appellant claims two things: he is entitled to “uninsured motorist coverage” for damages under 265 (1) of the Insurance Act. A Motion Judge dismisses the AppellantMARIE-FRANCE MAJOR
Marie-France Major is a partner in the firm. She drafts materials and provides advice and agency services to clients regarding applications, responses, factums and motions for appeals before the Supreme Court of Canada. Marie-France draws on her Doctor of Juridical Science from the University of California at Berkeley and years of experience as* Contact Us
* Newsletter
* Français
* HOME
* ABOUT US
* Testimonials
* OUR TEAM
* Eugene Meehan, Q.C. * Marie-France Major* Thomas Slade
* Cory Giordano
* Appellate Support Staff* SERVICES
* Supreme Court of Canada* Court of Appeal
* Complex Legal Opinions* NEWS & RESOURCES
* News
* Media Coverage
* Articles & Papers
* Precedents
* Newsletter Archives* Video CLE
* Students
* BLOG
* Court of Appeal Decision of the Week * Matters Recently Opened at the SCC * Supreme One-Liners * One-Liners: Appeals * One-Liners: Leaves to Appeal * One-Liners: Oral Judgments* Year in Review
* Last Word
WELCOME TO SUPREME ADVOCACY We are a boutique law firm focusing on: Supreme Court of Canada advocacy and agency; Court of Appeal factums; and complex legalopinions.
We work with lawyer-clients to produce Applications for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Factums that stand out from the rest. Our lawyers have extensive experience in a diverse range of practice areas and can provide you with the legal answers you need. To strengthen appeals to provincial and federal courts, we have expert counsel to draft and revise Appellant or Respondent factums.RECENT NEWS
AUGUST 8, 2019:
THE SCC DISMISSED THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM THE DECISION _MAWHINNEY V. SCOBIE, _2019 ABCA 76 . SUPREME ADVOCACY ACTED AS AGENT FOR THEAPPLICANT.
AUGUST 8, 2019:
THE SCC DISMISSED THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM THE DECISION _MAWHINNEY V. SCOBIE, _2019 ABCA 76 . SUPREME ADVOCACY ACTED AS AGENT FOR THEAPPLICANT.
AUGUST 8, 2019:
THE SCC DISMISSED THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM THE DECISION _VAN RAAY PASKAL FARMS LTD. V. COUNTY OF LETHBRIDGE,_2017 ABQB 274 .
SUPREME ADVOCACY ACTED AS AGENT FOR THE RESPONDENT.* HOME
* ABOUT US
* OUR TEAM
* SERVICES
* NEWS & RESOURCES
* BLOG
340, rue Gilmour St. Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0R3 Tel./Tél.: (613) 695-8855 Fax/Téléc.: (613) 695-8580 Twitter: @supremeadvocacy Privacy Policy | Terms ofUse
Details
Copyright © 2024 ArchiveBay.com. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | DMCA | 2021 | Feedback | Advertising | RSS 2.0