“If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a wagon” –Yiddish proverb
A recent decision of the Ontario Divisional Court upheld a contractually agreed-upon limitation period and enforced it against a third party, even in circumstances where it appeared to be at odds with the statutory provisions of the Limitations Act, 2002.
All professionals deal with difficult clients from time to time. Difficult clients are often characterized by an aversion to receiving negative opinions and a refusal to heed the counsel of the professionals they have retained. A natural temptation when dealing with such clients might be to stop giving negative opinions to them and to instead focus on simply completing the tasks which the client...
It is commonly accepted that the evidence of expert witnesses must be impartial and that they owe a duty to the court to give fair, objective and non-partisan opinion evidence.
In Salasel v. Cuthbertson (2015 ONCA 115), the Court of Appeal provided welcome clarification on the doctrine of absolute privilege, in a decision that revisited the case of Hassan Rasouli.
Administrative lawyers and regulators should take note: in Swart v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Prince Edward Island the Prince Edward Island Court of Appeal provided express guidance in the prosecution of complaints against doctors.
On an appeal from a Rule 21 motion, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Personal Health Information Protection Act, S.O. 2004, c. 3, Sch. A (PHIPA) does not create an exhaustive code precluding a civil action for intrusion upon seclusion.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has reinforced the principle that a person's privileged communications with his or her lawyer should be strictly protected, except in narrow circumstances.