3 total
Costs of $45,000 awarded against unsuccessful applicants in judicial review; public interest litigation argument rejected.
Following the dismissal of their judicial review application, the applicants argued they should not pay costs because the application was public interest litigation.
The Divisional Court rejected this argument, finding the application was motivated by the practitioner applicants' commercial interests.
The court awarded costs of $30,000 to the Transitional Council and $15,000 to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, finding the Transitional Council's initial claim of up to $125,297.56 excessive.
The court ordered all applicants, including patient applicants, to be jointly and severally liable for the costs.
Application challenging Traditional Chinese Medicine Act regulations as ultra vires and unconstitutional dismissed.
The applicants sought a declaration that Ontario Regulation 27/13 under the Traditional Chinese Medicine Act, 2006 was ultra vires and breached sections 7 and 15 of the Charter.
They argued the regulation failed to create a 'doctor' class of practitioners and imposed discriminatory English or French language fluency requirements.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the regulation was intra vires, there is no section 7 Charter right to practice a profession unfettered by regulation, and language alone is not a protected ground under section 15.
Economic tort claims arising from disparaging words are not barred by the two-year limitation period for slander.
The appellant manufacturer sued a competitor and its employee for slander, inducement of breach of contract, and interference with economic relations after the employee allegedly told customers the appellant's product was dangerous.
The slander claim was withdrawn as it was outside the two-year limitation period.
The motion judge struck the remaining claims, finding they were an attempt to indirectly plead slander.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the economic torts were distinct causes of action that provided remedies for commercial losses not covered by slander, and were therefore not barred by the two-year limitation period.
