Larissa C. Moscu

The applicants, anchor tenants in three shopping malls, sought to assign and sublease their leases to a joint venture limited partnership.

The respondent landlords refused consent.

The court held that consent was not required because the leases were being assigned to the general partner, which was an affiliate of the existing tenant, thus falling under the leases' Affiliate Exception.

Alternatively, the court found that the landlords unreasonably withheld consent for two of the leases, as the tenant would remain liable and continue operating the stores, but the landlord was entitled to arbitrarily withhold consent for the third lease based on its specific terms.

The defendants sought leave to appeal an order certifying a class proceeding for unpaid overtime on behalf of approximately 7,800 employees.

The defendants argued the certification decision conflicted with appellate authority regarding systemic practices and misclassification.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding no conflicting decisions and no good reason to doubt the correctness of the motion judge's order, as the plaintiff had properly framed the case around a systemic policy rather than individual misclassification.

The plaintiff in a certified class action brought a motion to strike the defendants' reply factum filed on a motion for leave to appeal.

The plaintiff argued the reply factum violated Rule 61.03.1(11) of the Rules of Civil Procedure by re-arguing issues rather than responding to new issues.

The Divisional Court agreed, finding that the plaintiff's responding factum did not raise new issues but merely responded to the defendants' original arguments.

The motion was granted, the reply factum was struck, and costs of $5,000 were awarded to the plaintiff.

This costs decision followed a successful certification motion in a proposed class proceeding.

The moving party sought substantial indemnity costs after the date of a Rule 49 offer, arguing that the certification result met or exceeded the offer terms.

The court accepted that submission, adjusted counsel hourly rates to conform with the costs grid, removed a legal research disbursement, reviewed comparable historical certification costs awards, and fixed fair and reasonable costs at $175,000 all-inclusive.

After deducting prior costs awarded to the responding parties on a refusals motion, the court ordered payment of $161,500 forthwith.

On a certification motion in a proposed overtime class action against a federally regulated trucking employer, the court held that the claim was not framed as a misclassification case requiring individualized overtime entitlement determinations, but as a systemic challenge to the employer’s overtime policies, practices, and record-keeping.

Applying the s. 5(1)(c) commonality requirement under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, the court found some basis in fact for most proposed common issues, including contractual incorporation of overtime obligations, alleged systemic avoidance of overtime, good faith duties, negligence-based record-keeping duties, unjust enrichment, the effect of an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance, class-wide liability, aggregate damages, and punitive damages.

The court refused to certify issues that depended on individual proof of actual overtime entitlement or that were too broad or unnecessary.

The action was certified as a class proceeding.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member alleging incompetence following three consecutive unsatisfactory performance appraisals.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the member incompetent, noting significant deficiencies in pupil learning, professional knowledge, teaching practice, leadership, and ongoing professional learning.

The Committee ordered terms, conditions, and limitations on the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, requiring the successful completion of an additional qualification course and performance appraisals upon return to teaching.

The Member, a teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct for massaging the feet of a special education student without parental consent.

The Member claimed the touching was a sensory technique, but acknowledged failing to inform the parents or obtain their consent.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered a reprimand, a one-month suspension, and the completion of courses on boundaries and special education.

The Committee ordered publication of the decision without the Member's name, noting the misconduct was at the lower end of the spectrum and involved poor judgment rather than inappropriate touching.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member who had been convicted criminally of possessing child pornography.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct based on the criminal conviction.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and directed that the decision be published with the member's name.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct after engaging in repeated unwanted contact with a colleague over 18 months, which culminated in a criminal conviction for harassment.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand and the completion of a boundaries course.

The Committee also ordered the publication of the member's name in the College's official publication, emphasizing the need for general deterrence and transparency given the serious nature of the misconduct.

The Ontario College of Teachers alleged that the member committed professional misconduct by telling a student she felt violent and wanted to shoot her.

The member admitted to saying 'I could shoot you' out of frustration when the student lost an assignment, but denied mentioning a gun or feeling violent.

The Discipline Committee found that while the language was intemperate and inappropriate, it was inadvertent and did not breach a reasonable boundary of classroom management.

The Committee dismissed all allegations of professional misconduct, concluding that the member's conduct did not meet the threshold for a finding of professional misconduct.

In a medical malpractice action brought by a self-represented and incarcerated plaintiff, the court addressed several procedural motions in case management.

The plaintiff sought leave to amend the statement of claim, compel answers to discovery questions, obtain production of hospital employment documents, strike portions of an affidavit, and require production of audio recordings from discovery.

The court granted the motion to amend and the motion to strike specified affidavit paragraphs on consent.

Motions seeking further answers to questions, additional productions from the hospital, and production of audio recordings were dismissed for lack of relevance or because the requested materials were not in the defendants’ possession.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for professional misconduct.

The member was alleged to have thrown chairs, used profane language, belittled support staff, and bullied colleagues regarding a parking space.

The member did not attend the hearing.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, noting his erratic and unacceptable behaviour created a culture of fear.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, completion of an anger management course, a psychiatric assessment prior to returning to teaching, and publication of the decision with the member's name.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought professional misconduct allegations against a former teacher for engaging in a sexual relationship with a student during the 1988-1989 and 1989-1990 academic years.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, noting the member's grooming behaviour and blatant disregard for professional boundaries.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the member's teaching certificate and publication of the decision with his name.

The member, a teacher, pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for sexually abusing a male student in 1974.

The member had previously been convicted of indecent assault under the Criminal Code for the same conduct and received a conditional sentence.

The Discipline Committee accepted the agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty, revoking the member's teaching certificate and ordering publication of the decision with the member's name to serve as a general deterrent.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member for professional misconduct involving physical and verbal abuse of students over a three-year period.

The member pleaded no contest to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a three-month suspension, a reprimand, completion of a course in anger and classroom management, and publication of the decision with the member's name.

The member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for possessing inappropriate and nude images on his classroom computer, which were briefly viewed by a student.

This conduct also breached a prior written undertaking the member had given to the College not to use school computers for such purposes.

The member pled no contest to the allegations and admitted the facts.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered the immediate revocation of the member's teaching certificate.

The Committee also ordered publication of the decision with the member's name, emphasizing the need for specific and general deterrence.