The Supreme Court of Canada in 2024 delivered an important decision in the area of regulatory prosecutions in the case of R. v. Greater Sudbury (City). This appeal arose from a fatal accident and concerned the proper interpretation of Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1 (“Act”).

The Corporation of the City of Greater Sudbury contracted with Interpaving Limited to act as constructor to repair a downtown water main. An Interpaving employee tragically struck and killed a pedestrian when driving a road grader, in reverse, through an intersection.  Contrary to the accompanying regulation, Construction Projects, O. Reg. 213/91 ("Regulation"), no fence was placed between the construction project workplace and the public intersection, and no signaller was assisting the Interpaving worker (see ss. 65 and 104(3)). In separate proceedings, Interpaving was tried and convicted for breaching the duty of employers under s. 25(1)(c) of the Act to "ensure that ... the measures and procedures prescribed [in the Regulation] are carried out in the workplace".

Important changes to accident benefits are coming to Ontario in 2026. Learn how these changes will impact the litigation landscape for accident benefits, priority disputes, and tort MVA claims.

Mark Crane, President of the Toronto Lawyers’ Association, was quoted in Law Times expressing concerns about the Law Society of Ontario’s proposed governance reforms. He highlights the risks of reducing elected representation and shifting power to appointed benchers.

Legal fees measured by time dockets are a fundamental aspect of the lawyer-client relationship. However, they are not just a private matter between a lawyer and a client - they are also subject to audit by the court.

In Ontario, the court retains a supervisory jurisdiction over legal fees, and this role extends beyond mere mathematical calculations of time and hourly rates. The court ensures that legal services are billed fairly, in accordance with the principles under the Solicitors Act.

The decision in Belyavsky v. Monkhouse Law, 2024 ONSC 4970 illustrates that lawyers must be extra careful when docketing their time on a case. 

Introduction

Most franchise agreements specifically: (i) grant the franchisee the right to operate a business from a single location; and (ii) state that the franchise agreement’s term expires either at a specified date or when the franchisee ceases to have the right to operate the franchised business from the premises, using wording along the following lines: 

“Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, the Franchisor hereby grants to the Franchisee the right and license to operate the Franchised Business at the location specified in Schedule “A” … for a term (the “Term”) equal to the lesser of: 

1. ten (10) years; and
2. the term of the Lease as may be the case, and any renewals thereunder;” 

The decision of the Saskatchewan King’s Bench in Vern’s Pizza Company Limited v 101011333 Saskatchewan Ltd, involved the court determining when a franchise agreement which granted the franchisee a right to operate two franchised businesses from two separate leased locations, comes to an end. 

In the April 2022, Toronto Law Journal, I wrote an article entitled “There is No Afterlife for Administrative Monetary Penalties After Bankruptcy”. In that article I used the following hypothetical.

A securities broker may be alleged to have defrauded investors by making false statements regarding the use of their funds, and by using invested funds for improper purposes.  In the administrative regime, the securities broker may face restrictions on professional activities or an administrative monetary penalty (“AMP”) of not more than a $1 million for each failure to comply.

Following the imposition of a significant AMP in the millions of dollars, that same securities broker may think that she was fortunate that she was not prosecuted for fraud under the Criminal Code. She may also take some solace in the thought that the AMP, unlike a criminal fine in relation to fraudulent conduct, would not survive a pending bankruptcy. This  would enable her to get on her feet again.

Securities regulators take a different view and would argue that extinguishing the AMP would undermine the deterrent effect of the penalty imposed

We’re looking for members to join our Board and committees! Get involved to gain valuable leadership experience, build meaningful relationships, and help shape the future of our legal community.

Following our ongoing concerns about the Metrolinx Ontario Line project and its impact on Osgoode Hall's historical grounds, TLA President, Erin O'Donovan, interviewed with Global News to continue voicing our stand on this issue.

Erin O’Donovan, TLA President, was quoted in a CTV article about a Toronto man who attacked a lawyer in the tow truck wars.