David G. Molson

The accused was charged with assault causing bodily harm and possession of a weapon (a coffee mug) for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, arising from an incident at the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation on November 2, 2012.

The central issue was self-defence.

The court determined that the old self-defence provisions under the Criminal Code (sections 34 and 37) applied rather than the new provisions introduced by Bill C-26 on March 11, 2013, finding that the new law was substantive and therefore prospective only.

The court found a reasonable doubt regarding self-defence and acquitted the accused.

The landlord appealed a decision denying her application to terminate a residential tenancy for her own use and the use of her children.

The initial application was denied because possession was sought for her children, not herself.

A subsequent application was denied on the basis of res judicata.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding res judicata inapplicable or subject to discretion, and incorporated the parties' Minutes of Settlement into the court order.

The respondents brought a request for an order during proceedings to remove the individual respondent, the corporation's president, from the human rights application.

The applicant did not respond to the request.

Applying the Persaud factors, the Tribunal found that the corporate respondent could remedy any potential violations, the individual respondent's conduct was not a central issue, and there was no prejudice to the applicant.

The request was granted and the personal respondent was removed to prevent unnecessary complexity.