Geoff Laplante

The appellant appealed her conviction for driving over the legal blood alcohol limit, arguing the trial judge erred by finding breath samples were taken as soon as practicable and by conducting his own back calculation of her blood alcohol concentration without expert evidence.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge's conclusions were reasonable and supported by the evidence.

The court held that the trial judge correctly applied judicial notice of alcohol elimination rates to determine the appellant's blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving, and that the failure to meet the prerequisites for the presumption of identity did not automatically exclude the breath readings.

The appellant father brought a motion for a stay pending appeal of an Ontario Court of Justice order that transferred the children’s primary residence from him to the mother.

The court reviewed the applicable framework for stays of custody orders under s. 74 of the Children’s Law Reform Act and considered jurisprudence addressing the RJR‑MacDonald test and its modification in family law contexts.

The court found the appeal raised a serious issue, particularly regarding whether the trial judge misapprehended evidence about an ex parte custody order and improperly discounted the status quo.

Given the young ages of the children and the risk of instability if they were moved pending the appeal, the court concluded that their best interests favoured maintaining the current arrangement.

A stay of the trial judge’s custody order was granted pending the appeal.

The applicant alleged that her employment as a Customer Service Representative was terminated because she disclosed she was pregnant, contrary to the Human Rights Code.

The respondents claimed she was terminated due to performance issues, specifically slowness and speaking too softly.

The Tribunal found that while there were legitimate performance issues, the discovery of the applicant's pregnancy was a factor that contributed significantly to the decision to terminate her employment.

The Tribunal awarded the applicant $3,600 for wage loss and $10,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.