4 total
Action stayed due to foreign forum selection clause, but domestic injunction against bank extended.
The Republic of Korea (South Korea) moved to dismiss Best Theratronics Ltd.'s breach of contract action and set aside an injunction preventing The ICICI Bank of Canada from disbursing funds under a Standby Letter of Credit (SBLC).
Best Theratronics Ltd. cross-moved to extend the injunction.
The court found that a forum selection clause in the contract granted exclusive jurisdiction to South Korean courts for the main action between Best and South Korea, leading to a stay of those proceedings in Ontario.
However, the court extended the temporary injunction against The ICICI Bank of Canada, noting that the SBLC was governed by Ontario law and the Bank was not bound by the forum selection clause.
The injunction was continued on terms to allow Best to pursue remedies in South Korea, with provisions for its eventual termination.
Employer’s OHSA conviction upheld; failure to implement fall arrest precautions defeated due diligence defence.
The appellant employer appealed a conviction under s. 25(1)(c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act arising from a workplace accident where a worker fell more than three metres from a sawmill catwalk while clearing a conveyor jam without fall arrest protection.
The trial court had acquitted the employer on a guardrail-related charge but convicted on a fall-arrest charge.
On appeal, the employer argued the trial judge made inconsistent findings on foreseeability and lacked evidence supporting the conclusion that workers would cross the guardrail to access the conveyor.
The Superior Court held that the trial judge’s reasoning distinguished between the guardrail and fall-arrest charges and properly found that accessing the conveyor to clear jam-ups was foreseeable.
The court concluded that the employer failed to establish due diligence because it did not implement reasonable safety precautions or training requiring fall arrest protection.
The conviction was upheld.
Leave to appeal denied; genuine issues of fact regarding municipal liability for a pothole require trial.
The defendant municipality sought leave to appeal a motions judge's refusal to grant summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim.
The plaintiff sued for damages after slipping and falling in a pothole while crossing a roadway.
The Divisional Court denied leave to appeal, finding no good reason to doubt the correctness of the motions judge's conclusion that genuine issues of material fact required a trial, particularly regarding the state of repair of the roadway and the municipality's duty of care to pedestrians crossing outside of designated crosswalks.
Motion to strike granted; judicial review of Mining Recorder's decision statute-barred and a collateral attack.
The applicants sought judicial review of a 1998 decision by a Mining Recorder to register mining claims subject to an aggregate permit.
The Crown respondents brought a motion to strike portions of the application.
The Divisional Court granted the motion, finding that the request to review the Recorder's decision was statute-barred under s. 135 of the Mining Act, which strictly prohibits extensions of time despite the Judicial Review Procedure Act.
The court also held that the application constituted an impermissible collateral attack on the Mining and Lands Commissioner's subsequent appellate decision.
