Audrey-Anne Delage

On a motion arising within a wrongful conviction action, the moving parties sought leave to file a responding record after cross-examining the defendant on his summary judgment affidavit.

The court applied the flexible Rule 39.02(2) test and held the proposed evidence was relevant to credibility and to the nature of the defendant's investigative role, responded to issues raised on cross-examination, and was not shown to cause non-compensable prejudice.

The court declined to finally determine admissibility at this stage, holding that issue should generally be left to the summary judgment judge.

Leave was granted with terms requiring advance particulars of the alleged contradictions and permitting a responding affidavit.

Le comité de discipline a tenu une audience sur la sanction concernant une enseignante suppléante reconnue coupable de fautes professionnelles, incluant un manque de supervision, une mauvaise gestion de classe, des commentaires inappropriés et des interventions physiques injustifiées envers des élèves.

La membre, qui se représentait elle-même, n'a pas participé à l'audience.

Le comité a ordonné une réprimande écrite, une suspension de huit mois de son certificat de qualification et d'inscription, ainsi que l'obligation de réussir un cours sur la gestion de classe avant de pouvoir réintégrer la profession.

De plus, appliquant les facteurs de l'arrêt Hall, le comité a ordonné à la membre de verser 20 000 $ en frais à l'Ordre en raison de son manque de coopération durant l'instance.

The Ontario College of Teachers held a penalty hearing for a member found guilty of professional misconduct, including inadequate supervision, poor classroom management, inappropriate remarks, and grabbing a student's arm.

The member did not attend the penalty hearing.

The Discipline Committee ordered a written reprimand, an eight-month suspension, and the successful completion of a course on classroom management and supervisory responsibilities before returning to practice.

The Committee also ordered the member to pay $20,000 in costs to the College due to her uncooperative conduct during the proceedings.

This costs endorsement follows the Court of Appeal’s decision allowing the appellants’ appeal in part.

The court found that the trial judge erred in requiring Mak Mera Limited to repay US$405,000 and in awarding $200,000 in defamation damages to James Bay Resources Limited.

The appellants were awarded costs of the appeal and, after submissions on trial costs, the court awarded the appellants $400,000 in trial costs, payable by James Bay, as a fair and proportionate amount in light of the appeal outcome and the parties’ relative success.

This appeal arose from a dispute between James Bay Resources Limited and Mak Mera Nigeria Limited regarding two agreements for oil and gas consulting services in Nigeria, as well as a claim for defamation.

The trial judge had ordered Mak Mera to repay US$405,000 in service fees, characterizing them as advances, and awarded James Bay $200,000 in defamation damages.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge erred in her contract interpretation because the monetary payments were unconditional fees for services rendered, not repayable advances.

Additionally, the court reduced the defamation damages to a nominal award of $1,000 because the substantial award was unsupported by the evidence.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a discipline proceeding against a member for professional misconduct involving multiple students over several academic years.

The member made disparaging and intimidating remarks to students, humiliated a student with special needs, and failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries by hugging students and engaging in inappropriate physical contact.

The member pled no contest to the allegations.

The Discipline Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, including verbal and psychological abuse, and conduct unbecoming a member.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of the member's certificate, and the successful completion of a course on professional boundaries.

The respondents moved to quash an application for judicial review brought by Ontario Place for All Inc. regarding the redevelopment of Ontario Place's West Island.

The respondents argued that the newly enacted Rebuilding Ontario Place Act, 2023 exempted the project from the Environmental Assessment Act, making the application moot or bound to fail.

The single judge of the Divisional Court declined to quash the application, finding that the issues raised significant public law concerns regarding governance and environmental protection that warranted consideration by a full panel of the Divisional Court.