Carita Pereira

The plaintiffs, franchisors of fast food restaurants, moved under Rule 45 of the Rules of Civil Procedure for orders freezing the defendants’ bank accounts and compelling disclosure of financial records after alleging diversion of franchise fees.

The court considered whether the allegedly diverted funds constituted a specific fund capable of preservation under Rule 45.02, and whether the balance of convenience supported interim relief.

Finding a serious issue to be tried and drawing an adverse inference from the defendant’s erasure of a laptop hard drive containing relevant records, the court concluded the plaintiffs had a strong claim to the disputed funds.

The defendants’ bank accounts were ordered frozen and full banking records disclosed.

Requests for a Mareva injunction against the defendant’s residence and non-competition relief were refused due to insufficient evidence.

The applicant, who suffered a work-related injury, alleged that her employer discriminated against her on the basis of disability by failing to accommodate her, harassing her, denying her a raise, disciplining her for attendance issues, and ultimately laying her off and terminating her employment.

The Tribunal found that the employer had accommodated her by providing light duties that met her medical restrictions.

The Tribunal also accepted the employer's non-discriminatory explanations that the applicant was disciplined for excessive, unsubstantiated tardiness and early departures, and that she was laid off and terminated due to a severe economic downturn and shortage of work based on her low seniority.

The application was dismissed.

The respondent filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings to dismiss the application on the basis that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on disability.

The Tribunal found that the applicant established a prima facie case with respect to allegations of discipline and lay off/termination, but dismissed the remainder of the allegations.

The hearing was directed to proceed on the remaining issues.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging age discrimination and reprisal against her employer, the Centre for Spanish Speaking Peoples, and her union, OPSEU.

In an interim decision, the Tribunal considered whether the application disclosed a prima facie case and whether it should be deferred pending an OLRB complaint.

The Tribunal dismissed the application against OPSEU, finding no allegations that the union's actions were based on discriminatory factors.

The Tribunal allowed the age discrimination claim against the employer to proceed, as the applicant alleged age-related comments and denial of training, but dismissed the reprisal claim.

The request to defer the application was denied.

The appellant appealed the trial judge's decision finding that the respondents were employed under indefinite-term contracts and were entitled to reasonable notice of termination, as well as the award of Wallace damages.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings regarding the nature of the contracts, noting that the parties' conduct significantly varied from the written terms.

The court upheld the Wallace damages award for one respondent due to an unfounded and damaging pager message sent by the appellant, but set aside the award for the other respondent as there was no evidence of similar harm or mental distress.

The appeal was dismissed with respect to the first respondent and allowed in part for the second.

The appellant appealed a summary judgment order dismissing part of his defamation action arising from material posted on the respondent's website.

The motions judge had ruled the internet publication was a 'broadcast' under the Libel and Slander Act, rendering the claim statute-barred for failure to provide timely notice.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding a genuine issue for trial regarding whether the internet publication constituted a broadcast from a station in Ontario, particularly given conflicting expert evidence on the nature of internet dissemination.