Dr. Pollock

The worker, a law enforcement officer, suffered a left shoulder dislocation while striking a heavy bag during tactics training.

The WSIB initially allowed the claim but later determined the worker had reached maximum medical recovery and denied entitlement for recommended stabilization surgery, attributing the need for surgery to a pre-existing condition.

The worker appealed.

The Appeals Resolution Officer found that while the surgery was primarily required to address chronic, non-occupational instability, the workplace accident significantly contributed to the timing of the surgical recommendation.

The appeal was allowed, granting entitlement to the surgery as a "once only repair" under WSIB policy, though with no entitlement to a permanent impairment award.

The appellant was convicted of second degree murder for shooting and killing Andrew Christie in the doorway of Christie's apartment on December 19, 2004.

Although charged with first degree murder, the jury convicted him of the lesser charge.

He was sentenced to life imprisonment with parole ineligibility of 17 years.

On appeal, the appellant challenged the admission of evidence regarding an accomplice's manslaughter conviction, the deceased's ante-mortem statements, and the trial judge's jury instructions on post-offence conduct, self-defence, and provocation.

The appellant also challenged the sentence as unreasonable.

The Court of Appeal dismissed all grounds of appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's evidentiary rulings or jury instructions, and finding the sentence fit.

The accused pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography and making child pornography available.

The offences occurred between April 2011 and May 2011.

Police investigation identified the accused's computer sharing 105 suspected child pornography files on a peer-to-peer network.

Upon execution of a search warrant, two laptops belonging to the accused were seized containing a total of 404 child pornography videos and 40 child pornography images—the largest collection of child pornography videos ever seized by the Waterloo Regional Police.

The court imposed a sentence of 12 months custody followed by 3 years probation, with ancillary orders including DNA collection, a section 161 order for 5 years, and lifetime registration under the Sex Offender Information Registration Act.

The moving party father sought leave to appeal an interim order that changed sole custody to joint custody with week-about access, and ordered him to pay child support.

He argued the motion judge erred by finding a material change in circumstances and by deciding child support after presiding over a brief settlement conference.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding that the disproving of the father's earlier allegations regarding the mother's mental health and flight risk constituted a material change in circumstances.

The court also found no breach of the Family Law Rules regarding the settlement conference, as the motion judge relied solely on the evidentiary record.

The request for a stay pending appeal was also dismissed.

The member, a teacher, engaged in an inappropriate romantic and physical relationship with a high school student.

He was subsequently convicted of common assault in criminal court.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, including sexual abuse of a student.

The Committee ordered a two-year suspension of the member's certificate, a reprimand, and imposed conditions requiring the completion of a professional boundaries course and psychological clearance before returning to teaching.

The appellant was convicted of second degree murder.

At trial, the Crown relied on the testimony of a witness whose memory of seeing the appellant near the crime scene was refreshed through hypnosis, as well as similar fact evidence from a former girlfriend.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that post-hypnosis evidence is presumptively inadmissible because it does not meet the reliability requirements for novel scientific evidence.

The Court also found that the similar fact evidence lacked sufficient probative value to outweigh its prejudicial effect, and the curative proviso could not be applied.

The Crown appealed a sentence imposing a suspended sentence and probation for multiple offences arising from escalating domestic violence, criminal harassment, uttering a death threat, assaults, and repeated breaches of judicial release orders against a former intimate partner and her associates.

The court held that the sentencing judge erred in principle by focusing narrowly on breaches of court orders and failing to give proper weight to denunciation, general deterrence, specific deterrence, victim safety, and victim impact evidence.

Emphasizing the seriousness of predatory criminal harassment in a domestic context and Parliament's denunciatory approach to s. 264 of the Criminal Code, the court found that a penitentiary term was required.

The sentence appeal was allowed, the sentence was varied to 16 months' imprisonment after credit for pre-trial custody, probation was maintained and expanded to include counselling, and the firearms prohibition order was replaced.