Justin Safayeni

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the York Regional Police to include a withdrawn criminal charge in his Police Vulnerable Sector Check.

The Divisional Court set aside the decision, finding that the police breached procedural fairness by relying on undisclosed occurrence reports without giving the applicant an opportunity to respond.

The court also found the decision unreasonable for failing to justify how the applicant met the exceptional criteria for disclosing non-conviction information.

The matter was remitted for reconsideration under the newly enacted Police Record Checks Reform Act, 2015.

Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario sought to lift a stay on its $330 billion health care cost recovery action against three tobacco companies (JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco, Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.) and eleven co-defendants, which was imposed under CCAA proceedings.

Ontario proposed to temporarily stay the effects of any judgment.

The court dismissed the motion, emphasizing the need to preserve the status quo in CCAA proceedings to facilitate a global resolution of significant claims.

Allowing Ontario's action to proceed would alter the level playing field, distract from restructuring efforts, and impose significant costs, prejudicing other stakeholders.

The Attorney General of Ontario applied under the Civil Remedies Act, 2001 for the forfeiture of the proceeds of the sale of six clubhouses used by the Outlaws Motorcycle Club, as well as various seized property including Outlaws paraphernalia, currency, and weapons.

The responding party argued the application was statute-barred and raised several Charter challenges.

The court found the clubhouses were both proceeds and instruments of unlawful activity and ordered the proceeds of their sale forfeited.

The court also ordered the forfeiture of wearable Outlaws paraphernalia, currency, documents, and weapons as instruments of unlawful activity.

The court found that while the forfeiture of wearable paraphernalia infringed s. 2(b) of the Charter, the infringement was justified under s. 1.

The court declined to order forfeiture of decorative paraphernalia, support wear, and 'white power' memorabilia, finding insufficient evidence they were instruments of unlawful activity.

The plaintiff brought a motion to compel the defendant, Luis Chibante, to answer refusals given during his examination for discovery.

The refusals concerned the use of funds borrowed from Mastronardi Produce and Luis Chibante's business ventures with individuals associated with Mastronardi Produce.

The court, applying principles of discovery scope and proportionality, ordered the defendant to provide a solicitor's trust statement confirming legal fees paid from the borrowed funds and to answer specific questions about his business interests with Mastronardi Produce associates, subject to confidentiality controls.

Luis Chibante brought a motion to strike three paragraphs from Lynne Chibante's statement of claim, alleging abuse of process, prejudice, delay, and no reasonable cause of action.

The paragraphs concerned allegations of wrongdoing related to Golden Fresh in Ohio and accessing private emails, which were deemed outside the scope of the agreed-upon trial of issues concerning Golden Acre in Ontario.

The court granted the motion, finding the paragraphs scandalous, vexatious, irrelevant, and likely to prejudice or delay the fair trial of the action.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against a Registered Practical Nurse for verbally and emotionally abusing elderly and vulnerable clients, including making inappropriate comments, a 'Heil Hitler-like' gesture, and referring to a client as 'lazy' and a 'waste of tax dollars'.

The Member admitted to the allegations via an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and accepted a Joint Submission on Order, imposing a five-month suspension, an oral reprimand, and terms, conditions, and limitations on his certificate of registration, including meetings with a nursing expert and employer notification.

The plaintiff brought a motion to set aside a Registrar's order dismissing his defamation action for delay.

The action was administratively dismissed after the plaintiff failed to set it down for trial by January 1, 2017, although he successfully filed his trial record on January 27, 2017.

The court found that the Registrar should not have dismissed the action after accepting the trial record.

Applying the four-part test for setting aside a dismissal order, the court found the plaintiff provided an adequate explanation for the delay, his failure to meet the deadline was inadvertent, the motion was brought promptly, and the defendants suffered no actual prejudice.

The motion was granted, but the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs to the defendants for seeking the indulgence.

The College of Nurses of Ontario alleged that the Member committed professional misconduct by failing to report an incident where she observed a colleague strike a psychiatric client and place him in a headlock.

The Member denied seeing the abuse, claiming she was focused on securing the client's ankles during the restraint.

Relying on video surveillance footage and witness testimony, the Discipline Committee found that the Member had ample opportunity to observe the abuse and did in fact see it.

The Committee rejected the defence expert's theory of unintentional blindness.

The Member was found to have breached the standards of practice and engaged in dishonourable and unprofessional conduct by failing to report the incident.

The Member, a Registered Practical Nurse, faced allegations of professional misconduct for administering and selling Botox and dermal fillers without authorization from a physician, failing to document pre-treatment assessments and client information, and misusing the protected title of Registered Nurse.

The Member admitted to the allegations through an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Committee found the Member committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a three-month suspension, and terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought allegations of professional misconduct against a registered nurse for misappropriating credit cards from clients, being convicted of multiple criminal offences including theft and failure to comply with recognizance, and failing to report these charges and convictions to the College.

The Discipline Committee found that the member committed the alleged acts of professional misconduct, noting her actions demonstrated a serious disregard for integrity, the law, and the profession.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's Certificate of Registration.

The College of Nurses of Ontario brought disciplinary proceedings against a registered nurse for physically and emotionally abusing two vulnerable clients at a facility for adults with developmental disabilities.

The member, who had previously pled guilty to six criminal counts of assault, did not attend the hearing.

Relying on video surveillance and witness testimony, the Discipline Committee found the member committed professional misconduct by contravening standards of practice and engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct.

The Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's certificate of registration and required him to appear for a reprimand.

The Court allowed the appeal and quashed the National Energy Board authorization for offshore seismic testing in Baffin Bay and Davis Strait.

It held that the Board’s approval process triggered the Crown’s duty to consult, and that the Crown may rely on a regulatory process to fulfill consultation obligations where that process is adequate.

On these facts, consultation was inadequate given the significance of Inuit treaty harvesting rights, the potential impacts of testing, limited participation opportunities, and insufficient accommodation.

The applicant sought judicial review of the New Democratic Party's internal decision to reject his candidacy for the party's leadership.

The court first determined that it had jurisdiction to review the decision, finding that the selection of a major political party's leader has a sufficiently broad public impact to bring it within the realm of public law.

However, applying a reasonableness standard, the court upheld the National Director's decision to reject the applicant, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias and concluding that the party was entitled to broad discretion in vetting its leadership candidates.

This endorsement addresses the approval of class counsel fees, plaintiffs' costs, defendants' costs, and the Law Foundation of Ontario's levy following a decade-long class action concerning the legality of Par account transactions (PATs) by London Life and Great-West Life.

The court approved class counsel fees of $16.4 million, found the plaintiffs entitled to $4 million in partial indemnity costs from the defendants, and denied the defendants' claim for costs.

It also determined that the Law Foundation of Ontario was entitled to a levy of $1,520,346.50 (repayment of disbursements) plus 10% of the net monetary award ($4,030,000), totaling $5,550,346.50, to be paid from the participating accounts.

The court clarified that a "monetary award" for the purposes of the Class Proceedings Act and the Law Society Act includes funds paid to the benefit of class members through participating accounts, even if not directly distributed to individuals.

The appellant municipality appealed a summary judgment finding it owed a duty of care to a class of tenants to provide statutory notices of rent reductions following property tax decreases.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the municipality's specific interactions with the tenants through a pilot project created sufficient relational proximity to establish a prima facie duty of care.

The court further found no residual policy reasons to negate this duty, as the claim was limited to a specific group and did not conflict with the municipality's statutory obligations.

The municipality's failure to send the required notices breached the standard of care.

The media applicants brought an application for a declaration that the police practice of impersonating journalists for criminal investigation and surveillance of public protests violates s. 2(b) of the Charter.

The court found no evidence that plainclothes officers engaging in surveillance held themselves out as journalists.

The court held that the evidentiary record did not support a finding that the practice of plainclothes surveillance in the presence of media had a chilling effect on news gathering.

The application was dismissed.

The appellant law firm performed collection work for the respondent bank under a written agreement.

Following the termination of the agreement, the parties disputed the interpretation of a provision regarding invoicing for services performed up to the termination date.

The motion judge agreed with the respondent's interpretation and granted summary judgment dismissing the action.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error or extricable question of law in the motion judge's interpretation of the contract.

The court also held that the general duty of honesty in contractual performance recognized in Bhasin v. Hrynew did not affect the interpretation.

The Attorney General sought forfeiture of a leisure sailboat under the Civil Remedies Act on the basis that it had been operated while the owner was impaired by alcohol or drugs.

The owner disputed that he had been operating the vessel and was self‑represented, lacked legal training, and did not speak English.

The court identified a significant legal issue as to whether the Civil Remedies Act could extend to forfeiture of property in circumstances where the property was not alleged to be proceeds or an instrument of organized criminal activity.

Given the broader implications for forfeiture practices and the imbalance in legal resources, the court appointed amicus curiae to assist on the legal issues.

The application was scheduled to return for argument after arrangements for the amicus appointment were finalized.

Following the dismissal of an action on cross-motions for summary judgment concerning contractual interpretation, the successful defendant sought costs exceeding $134,000 on a partial indemnity basis.

The court assessed the costs under Rule 57 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, considering proportionality, time spent, and the result achieved.

The judge reduced senior counsel’s claimed hourly rate and disallowed recovery for an expert where no expert report had been served under Tariff A. Applying the principles from appellate authorities governing fair and reasonable costs awards, the court fixed partial indemnity costs inclusive of HST.

The unsuccessful plaintiff was ordered to pay the adjusted costs within 30 days.

Media organizations sought certiorari to quash a provincial court judge’s order imposing a partial publication ban and denying access to a video exhibit tendered during a guilty plea for obstruction of justice arising from a detention-centre death.

The applicants argued that the provincial court judge lacked jurisdiction and that the order failed the Dagenais/Mentuck test.

The Superior Court held that the judge presiding over the guilty plea had jurisdiction to consider and grant a publication ban related to the proceeding before him.

The court found that the partial ban appropriately balanced open court principles with the fair trial rights of co‑accused facing related charges.

The court concluded that the order was necessary to prevent a real and substantial risk to the proper administration of justice and that no error of law appeared on the face of the record.