Emilie Bruneau

The applicant bank sought an order for possession and power of sale of a mortgaged condominium unit.

The respondent Singh claimed to be the beneficial owner of the property pursuant to a trust declaration with the registered owner, Andrade, and raised various defences including claims of fraud, knowing assistance to breach of trust, equitable mortgage, and equitable subordination.

The court found that Singh had failed to comply with court orders requiring him to pay the mortgage and granted the bank's application for possession and a writ of possession, stayed for 30 days to allow Singh to vacate.

In this putative securities class action arising from alleged misconduct by the former CEO of Endeavour Mining, the plaintiffs moved for an order requiring defendants to deliver statements of defence and produce insurance information by November 21, 2025.

The defendants opposed both requests, arguing that no statement of defence is required before leave to proceed is granted under the Securities Act, and that insurance information disclosure is premature.

The court dismissed both aspects of the motion, finding that prior to OSA leave being granted, the statutory claim is a nullity and therefore no defence is required, and that insurance disclosure is premature absent settlement discussions or leave being granted.

The member faced allegations of professional misconduct for physically and psychologically abusing students, including poking a student in the chest, drawing on a student's arm, and engaging in intimidating behaviour such as kicking a water bottle and throwing a highlighter.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the member's certificate, and the completion of a course on anger management and appropriate disciplinary measures.

The appellant, William Daniel Lewis, appealed a motion judge's decision dismissing a class action against Uber entities.

The core issue was whether the action, seeking a rebate of GST remitted to the government, was prohibited by the Excise Tax Act (ETA).

The Court of Appeal affirmed the motion judge's finding that section 312 of the ETA prohibits such actions, as the ETA provides a complete statutory framework for GST rebates, with exclusive jurisdiction vested in the Tax Court.

The court also agreed that section 224.1 of the ETA reinforces this statutory bar, extending protection from civil liability to tax collectors acting in compliance with the ETA.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Member was found guilty of professional misconduct and sexual abuse of a student following a plea of no contest and a Statement of Uncontested Facts.

The Discipline Committee accepted a Joint Submission on Penalty, ordering the immediate revocation of the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and directing the Member to receive a reprimand.

The plaintiff sought certification of a class action alleging that Uber improperly calculated Goods and Services Tax (GST) on pre-discounted Uber Eats orders, claiming violations of the Excise Tax Act (ETA), provincial consumer protection legislation, the Competition Act, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment.

The court dismissed the certification motion, primarily finding that the claim was barred by ss. 224.1 and 312 of the ETA.

The court characterized the action as an attempt to recover tax outside the comprehensive statutory scheme provided by the ETA, which includes a rebate mechanism.

Additionally, the court identified other deficiencies, including inadequate pleadings for certain causes of action, issues with class identifiability due to varying promotional language, and a lack of commonality among proposed issues, concluding that a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion to strike the Member's application for reinstatement.

The Member's certificate was deemed revoked in December 2020 following a finding of professional misconduct involving sexual abuse of a student.

In June 2023, the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 was amended to require a five-year waiting period from the date of deemed revocation before an application for reinstatement could be made.

The Member argued that the amendment should not apply retroactively to his pending application.

The Discipline Committee held that the wording of the amended Act and its transitional provisions clearly indicated a legislative intent for the five-year waiting period to apply to certificates deemed revoked prior to the transition date.

The Committee found that the presumption against retroactivity was rebutted because the amendments were intended to protect the public.

The motion was granted, the application was struck, and the Member was prohibited from reapplying before December 8, 2025.

The Member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for bringing a urinary catheter and a diagram of a vulva into a classroom and showing students how to insert it, and for repeatedly making false statements to her school board to obtain paid sick leave while attending court for personal matters.

The Member pleaded no contest to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct, including disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a two-month suspension of her Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and the successful completion of a course on professional ethics and boundaries.

The Member, a teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct after failing to immediately report overhearing a student say another student was going to bring a gun to school.

The Member waited three days before notifying the principal, which delayed the school's response and potentially jeopardized student safety.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand and the completion of a course on the duty to report threats made by students.

The Member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for verbally, physically, and psychologically abusing multiple students over several years.

The Member pleaded no contest to the allegations, admitting to incidents involving unnecessary physical force, aggressive language, and leaving students unsupervised.

The Discipline Committee accepted the uncontested facts and found the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a five-month suspension of the Member's certificate, and the completion of a course on classroom and anger management.

The Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers held a penalty hearing for a member previously found to have engaged in professional misconduct.

The member failed to implement individualized education plans (IEPs), made inappropriate remarks to students, and was insubordinate to her principal.

The member did not attend the penalty hearing.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, an eight-month suspension of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and the successful completion of a course on classroom management, appropriate communication, and boundary violations before returning to teaching.

The Member requested an adjournment of her discipline hearing, citing pending complaints involving third parties and a recent hospitalization.

The College consented to the adjournment but requested conditions.

The Discipline Committee granted the adjournment subject to conditions, including that the Member confirm the language of the hearing, a new date be set within five months, the parties discuss the case, and the Member provide a detailed medical report if seeking a future adjournment on medical grounds.

The Discipline Committee held a penalty hearing for a teacher previously found guilty of professional misconduct, including failing to accommodate students with IEPs, inadequate supervision, inappropriate remarks, and insubordination.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Committee ordered a written reprimand, an 8-month suspension of her certificate of qualification and registration, and the successful completion of a pre-approved course on classroom management and professional boundaries before returning to practice.

Written reasons were to follow.

The appellant appealed a Master's order granting the respondent leave to discontinue its defamation action.

The appellant argued that his outstanding anti-SLAPP motion under s. 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act precluded the respondent from discontinuing the proceeding, relying on the statutory stay in s. 137.1(5).

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the statutory prohibition on taking 'further steps' does not prevent a plaintiff from moving to bring the entire proceeding to an end with prejudice.

The court found the Master had jurisdiction and properly exercised her discretion to grant leave to discontinue on terms that barred subsequent actions.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought allegations of professional misconduct against a teacher for incidents occurring during the 2016-2017 academic year.

The allegations included failing to accommodate a student's Individual Education Plan, inadequately supervising students, making inappropriate and religiously-themed comments to students, and failing to assess student work or follow the approved curriculum.

The Discipline Committee found that the College proved the allegations on a balance of probabilities.

The Committee concluded that the teacher committed professional misconduct by failing to maintain the standards of the profession, verbally and psychologically abusing students, failing to supervise adequately, and engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

Le comité de discipline a tenu une audience sur la sanction après avoir conclu que l'enseignant avait commis une faute professionnelle en montrant des vidéos inappropriées, en faisant des commentaires inappropriés et en manquant à son devoir de surveillance.

Le comité a ordonné une réprimande, une suspension de trois mois de son certificat de qualification et d'inscription, et l'obligation de suivre un cours sur la gestion de classe avant de pouvoir accepter un nouveau poste.

Le comité a également ordonné à l'enseignant de payer des frais de 5 000 $ à l'Ordre, en tenant compte de son manque de coopération partiel et de sa capacité de payer.

The member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for verbally, physically, and psychologically abusing students, including an incident where she pulled a student's chair, causing the student to fall.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations and entered into an undertaking to resign from the College and never seek reinstatement.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct and, accepting a joint submission on penalty, ordered that the member be reprimanded.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the Member, who was almost 80 years old and in frail health.

The Member had signed an Undertaking and Acknowledgement in which he resigned from the College, agreed never to apply for reinstatement, and agreed never to hold a position requiring a teaching certificate.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal of the allegations in light of the undertaking was reasonable, protected the public interest, and ensured transparency through a notation on the public register.

The appellants appealed the dismissal of their action for delay by a motion judge, who had also dismissed their motion to extend the timetable.

The action, commenced in 2014, faced significant delays, primarily due to the appellants' failure to obtain written consent from the City of Ottawa (to whom the action was subrogated under the WSIA) for several years.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, finding that the appellants failed to provide an acceptable explanation for the inordinate delay and did not rebut the presumption of prejudice to the respondents, given the lack of progress in the litigation.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against the member for professional misconduct.

The member admitted to failing to maintain professional standards, verbally and psychologically abusing students, and engaging in disgraceful and unprofessional conduct.

The uncontested facts showed the member ignored a school nut-free policy, exchanged inappropriate emails with former students criticizing current students, refused to help struggling students, mocked incorrect answers using a Staples 'Easy' button, and used a computer for personal entertainment during class time.

The Discipline Committee accepted the joint submission on penalty, finding the member guilty of professional misconduct.

The member was reprimanded, suspended for six months, and ordered to complete a course on classroom communication and professional boundaries.