3 total
Judicial review dismissed; College reasonably balanced freedom of expression with public interest regarding COVID-19 misinformation.
Two registered nurses sought judicial review of decisions by the College of Nurses of Ontario's Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC).
The ICRC had directed the nurses to be cautioned and complete remedial education after they made public statements and social media posts spreading misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines and public health measures while identifying themselves as nurses.
The Divisional Court dismissed the applications, finding that the ICRC reasonably balanced the nurses' Charter right to freedom of expression with the College's statutory mandate to protect the public interest.
The Court held that the remedial actions were proportionate and that the ICRC did not exceed its jurisdiction as a screening committee.
Motion for further and better affidavit of documents dismissed; contested emails protected by privilege.
The plaintiff in a wrongful dismissal action brought a motion for a further and better Affidavit of Documents, challenging the defendant's claims of solicitor-client and litigation privilege over certain internal emails.
The plaintiff had previously received an anonymous package of the defendant's documents, which she reviewed before returning.
The court reviewed the contested documents and found that they were all protected by either solicitor-client privilege, as part of the continuum of legal advice, or litigation privilege, having been created for the dominant purpose of anticipated litigation following the plaintiff's termination.
The motion was dismissed, and the documents were not ordered to be produced.
Security for costs and execution-related relief were granted on the motion.
On a motion in the Court of Appeal, the respondent sought security for costs of the proceedings below and ancillary relief relating to examinations in aid of execution.
The court held that the examination evidence now satisfied the test under Rule 61.06(1)(a) for security for costs against the individual appellant, in addition to the corporate appellants.
The court distinguished prior authority suggesting judgment debtor examinations ordinarily await disposition of an appeal, finding the circumstances exceptional and relying on an earlier order lifting the stay.
Security of $150,000 was ordered, further execution-related relief was granted, and the moving party received costs on a solicitor and client scale.
