
	Where results make sense

Topic: Ontario Court of Appeal

Related Topics

List of communities in Ontario

Legislative Assembly of Ontario

Ontario

Brussels, Ontario

Ontario Progressive Conservative Party

List of Ontario separated municipalities

Steven Truscott

Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Guy Paul Morin

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Kidnapping

Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

List of regions of Canada

Section One of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

History of the Gay Community

In the News (Mon 8 Sep 08)

Gordon Brown

Derby County

Mike Huckabee

Lute Olson

Pearl Harbor

Sonia Gandhi

Ricky Hatton

Narendra Modi

Jesus Christ

Rudy Giuliani

	Ontario Court of Appeal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		The Ontario Court of Appeal is headquartered in downtown Toronto, in historic Osgoode Hall.
		In ninety-eight percent of cases, the Court of Appeal is the last avenue of appeal for litigants in the province.
		Courts of Appeal of the Provinces and Territories:
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Ontario_Court_of_Appeal (222 words)

	Same-sex marriage in Ontario - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		On June 10, 2003, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that current Canadian law on marriage violated the equality provisions in Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in being restricted to heterosexual couples.
		The appeals court struck down the stay of judgment given in the 2002 ruling, thereby causing the judgment to come into effect immediately.
		The court also ruled that two couples who had previously attempted to marry using an ancient common-law procedure called reading the banns would be considered legally married.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Ontario (580 words)

	Appeals against conviction and sentence
		In an appeal, arguments are generally limited to allegation of error committed by the trial judge such as rulings on the admission of evidence.
		Appeals involving indictable offences, or hybrid offences prosecuted by indictment, are to the Ontario Court of Appeal.
		Although the appeal court can compel witnesses to testify before it, it's more customary for the fresh evidence to be admitted by affidavit (sworn statement), accompanied by a transcript of cross-examination on the affidavit conducted by the other side.
	www.criminal-lawyer.on.ca /appeals.html (2293 words)

	McCarthy Tétrault LLP - Publications - Will Ontario Court of Appeal Decision Muddy the Waters? (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		In the Kingston case, the defence argued that, given the reluctance of the Ontario Court of Appeal in the 1995 Boise Cascade decision to rule on whether the discharge of a teaspoon of oil or silt was enough for conviction under the Fisheries Act, the law was still open in Ontario.
		The Court of Appeal held that the appeal judge had erred in applying the Inco test to the question of whether the leachate was deleterious for the purposes of subsection 36(3) of the Fisheries Act.
		The court stated its agreement with the decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in MacMillan Bloedel that the focus of the prohibition is on the substance that is added to the water, rather than the water after the addition of the substance.
	www.mccarthy.ca /pubs/publication.asp?pub_code=1599 (1977 words)

	Supreme Court Appeal
		The Ontario Court of Appeal recently refused to hear their appeal of an Ontario's Divisional Court ruling that consumer boycotts which cause economic harm to a corporation cross the line into illegality.
		The court was ruling on an appeal by the transnational pulp and paper giant Daishowa, who are seeking a permanent injunction against a five-year-old boycott campaign called by the Toronto Friends of the Lubicon (FOL) and claiming an unspecified amount in damages.
		The court case will now proceed possibly to appeal and eventually to a full trial in which the court will decide whether or not to make the injunction permanent and whether or not individual FOL members will be liable for the huge financial damages Daishowa claims the boycott has caused them.
	sisis.nativeweb.org /lubicon/appeal.html (825 words)

	Government Appeal Marijuana Law Decision
		Yesterday's hearing before the appeal court marked the latest legal battle over whether the federal government should provide marijuana to those who are prescribed it to ease their pain when other treatment has failed.
		Justice Sidney Lederman of the Ontario Superior Court concluded that the patients' rights to life, liberty and security of the person under section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated because they were forced to buy their medication on the streets.
		Jim Leising, Justice Canada's director of criminal prosecutions for Ontario, said federal lawyers will be in the appeal court tomorrow and Wednesday asking a panel of judges to overturn the Windsor case, along with a civil decision involving a Toronto man who operated a "compassion club" to supply medical users of pot.
	www.medicalmarihuana.ca /appeal.html (1941 words)

	Canada
		The Court of Appeal refused to apply the principle of issue estoppel to Minott because the parties to the two proceedings – the Board of Referees and the court action for wrongful dismissal – were not the same.
		The Court of Appeal noted that deciding whether the "same parties" requirement has been met is a difficult issue when, as in this case, one of the parties to the second proceeding (the court case) was entitled to participate in the first proceeding (the Board of Referees), but chose not to do so.
		Minott’s compensation, the Court of Appeal refused to intervene and concluded that the "rule of thumb" approach was not appropriate.
	www.shrm.org /global/publications/baker/599glob/canada.htm (2901 words)

	Canada, Hy and Zel's Inc. v. Ontario
		The Ontario Court of Appeal quashed an appeal of the interim order on jurisdictional grounds and at adjourned sine die an appeal from a finding of contempt which was made when the firm remained open in violation of the interim order.
		Attorney General of Ontario, required a plaintiff challenging a law of general application to establish that the legislation had a greater impact on the plaintiff than on the public at large and that the plaintiff had an interest affecting his or her personal, proprietary or pecuniary rights.
		A court's concern at this stage of the proceedings is whether there is enough material to assess the "nature of the interest" which the plaintiff is asserting.
	www.hrcr.org /safrica/access_courts/Canada/hy_zel_ont.html (1923 words)

	Canada, Danson v. Ontario (Attorney General)
		Appellant brought an application in the Supreme Court of Ontario pursuant to Rule 14.05(3)(h), which allows a proceeding to be brought by application where it is unlikely that there would be any material facts in dispute.
		The application for leave to appeal and the application to adduce fresh evidence were granted on the date of the oral hearing.
		The application, which seeks to attack the impugned rules on the basis of their alleged effects upon the legal profession in Ontario, should not be proceeded with because a Charter challenge based upon allegations of the unconstitutional effects of impugned legislation must be accompanied by admissible evidence of the alleged effects.
	www.hrcr.org /safrica/access_courts/Canada/danson_ontario.html (889 words)

	e-Lawg
		Innopex Limited, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that the duty to defend will be determined based on the policy wording and the allegations in the claim.
		In Simison v.Catlyn, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that a passenger in a stolen vehicle is not entitled to claim under the uninsured provisions of the passenger's mother's policy of insurance.
		The Court of Appeal concluded that the requirement for an insurer to sue in the name of its insured was a procedural rule.
	www.cacounsel.com /e-lawg/categories/lawInsurance (1225 words)

	Court (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		The court emphasized at the time that "a deal is a deal" and courts should respect people's expectations of finality and their right to determine their own financial affairs.
		The court also ruled judges could override final support agreements only if the former spouse seeking to revisit the deal was able to demonstrate their need for support -- or diminished ability to pay support -- was the result of "a radical, unforeseen change in circumstances" that was caused by the marriage.
		Now the Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled that the "almost inaccessible" test for overriding agreements set by the Supreme Court in 1987 no longer applies, since the spousal support provisions in the current Divorce Act, which was passed in 1985, are "substantially" different from the 1968 law.
	www.fathers.ca /court.htm (1170 words)

	Ontario Court of Appeal Rules on Residency Definition of the Fairness Is a Two-Way Street Act - Osler - Business Law in ...
		Her Majesty in Right of Ontario, an Ontario corporation applied to the court for a declaration that it was not a "person resident in a designated jurisdiction" for the purposes of the Act.
		As such, the judge concluded that the Ontario corporation was not a resident of Quebec for the purposes of the Act.
		As such, the Court of Appeal held that the Ontario corporation was not a resident of Quebec because the Quebec corporation did not hold more than 50% of its shares.
	www.osler.com /resources.aspx?id=10046 (874 words)

	Hembruff v. OMERS: Ontario Court of Appeal Reverses Trial Decision; Rejects Notion of a Duty to Disclose Potential ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		The Court of Appeal’s judgment was written by Justice Eileen Gillese, former law professor and dean and former chair of Ontario’s Pension Commission.
		The Court went on to say that a broad disclosure obligation would thus put a plan administrator in an “invidious position” if potential changes were announced and then discarded, because some members may have made decisions to their detriment in reliance on the earlier announcements.
		The Court of Appeal, though, said that any effective date necessarily creates a dividing line, with some benefiting and others not, and that had the Board in November 1998 recommended the amendments without a fixed date, the effective date would have been the enactment date, May 5, 1999.
	www.hg.org /articles/article_869.html (1678 words)

	Appeal Update (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		The Court of Appeal noted that the parties and intervenors all conceded that sexual relations between a health professional and his or her patient are unacceptable.
		The Court of Appeal agreed that there is a certain amount of stress, anxiety and stigma that arises in the context of disciplinary proceedings relating to sexual abuse allegations.
		The Court of Appeal pointed out that Section 2(d) is designed to promote social interaction and collective action of a mostly public nature and has not been applied to protect intimate personal relationships.
	www.cpso.on.ca /Publications/Dialogue/0305/appeal.htm (1555 words)

	ontario provincial courts in Ontario
		Judgments of the Ontario Court of Justice justice in the province of Ontario falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Attorney
		Ontario`s Provincial Division is considered a leader in judicial administration and has set The task of bringing Ontario`s courts into the electronic age presents many challenges.
		The Ontario Court of Appeal is headquartered in downtown Toronto, in historic Osgoode Hall Provincial Courts of the Provinces and Territories : BC
	www.canadianbusinessdirectory.ca /historyon_ontario_provincial_courts.htm (216 words)

	McCarthy Tétrault LLP - Publications - Keays v. Honda — Decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		The Ontario Court of Appeal ("Court") released its much-anticipated decision in the appeal of the landmark case Keays v.
		The Court commented that "what might seem to be a very generous extension must be seen in the circumstances of this employee." To that end, the Court cited Keays’ vulnerability as an employee at the time of termination and his added vulnerability as a result of his disability.
		In reducing the punitive damages award to $100,000, the majority of the Court implied that such an award will normally be the upper end of the range in wrongful dismissal cases, unless the misconduct of the defendant persists for several years or there is a pattern of abuse by the defendant.
	www.mccarthy.ca /pubs/publication.asp?pub_code=2913 (1493 words)

	HeenanBlaikie.com / Expertise / Publications / From the Ontario Court of Appeal: Some Unions Have Legal Capacity to Sue ...
		The Court of Appeal determined that reasonable notice was to be calculated from March 11, 1998 when the employer gave a certain date for termination.
		The Court of Appeal also drew a distinction between an award of aggravated damages for mental distress and damages for the tort of intentional infliction of mental suffering.
		The Court of Appeal rejected Baycrest's argument that its employees' acts were in compliance with an employer's statutory duty under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act to contact the employee after injury and maintain contact to ensure the employee's early return.
	www.heenanblaikie.com /fr/expertise/publications/item?id=390 (1274 words)

	Equal Marriage for Same Sex Couples \| Legal \| Ontario Court of Appeal
		In a unanimous 3-0 decision, the court concurred with the previous Ontario divisional court ruling that declared it was unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry.
		The Court of Appeal for Ontario embraced a remedy that was first proposed by Justice Laforme in a minority view in Ontario divisional court.
		We are deeply grateful for the wisdom of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, the Ontario divisional court, and the courts in British Columbia and Quebec.
	www.samesexmarriage.ca /legal/ontario_case/appeal/June102003.htm (1821 words)

	OSC: News Releases 2005 - Ontario Court of Appeal Restores Commission's 15 Year Sanctions in Piergiorgio Donnini Matter ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		Toronto – In a unanimous decision issued today, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the Commission's appeal of the decision of the Ontario Divisional Court and restored the Commission's 15 year sanctions imposed on Piergiorgio Donnini.
		Donnini had appealed to the Divisional Court the Commission's findings that he committed unlawful insider trading, the Commission's order imposing the 15 year sanctions and award of costs against him.
		The Divisional Court had dismissed Donnini's appeal from the finding that he committed unlawful insider trading, but allowed the appeal in respect of the sanctions imposed on Donnini and the award of costs.
	www.osc.gov.on.ca /Media/NewsReleases/2005/nr_20050128_osc-donnini.jsp (600 words)

	Class Action Lawsuit against Inco reaches Court of Appeal (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		An appeal was heard by the Divisional Court in June 2003 which agreed with the lower court's ruling.
		The Ontario Court of Appeal is expected to hear the appeal for these decisions early in 2005.
		In granting permission to allow the appeal to be heard, the Court of Appeal disagreed with Inco's argument that this class action certification case does not deserve further consideration.
	www.environmentaldefence.ca /pressroom/releases/20040921.htm (474 words)

	Gay News From 365Gay.com
		September 27, 2006 - 3:00 pm ET (Toronto, Ontario) In the first case of its kind in Canada, possibly the world, a court is being asked to designate a lesbian couple and their son's biological father all the boy's legal parents.
		Among the Court of Appeal justices hearing the case is Chief Justice Roy McMurtry.
		The court under McMurtry was the first in Canada to strike down the ban on same-sex marriage leading to similar rulings in most other provinces and resulting in the federal government rewriting marriage law to provide for gay marriage.
	www.365gay.com /Newscon06/09/092706parents.htm (445 words)

	Ontario Court of Appeal Decides Sexual Harassment Case (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-19)
		In a widely publicized decision, the Ontario Court of Appeal released an important employment case on December 21, 2001 that should prove useful guidance to Ontario employers on how to treat those employees, especially persons in positions of authority, who perpetuate sexual harassment in the workplace.
		The issue for the Court of Appeal was whether there was just cause for dismissal based on six incidents of conduct which the Association says amounted to sexual harassment of female employees, and created a sexually infused office environment.
		The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had erred in his decision by failing to consider objectively Simpson's admitted conduct toward female employees, in the context of assessing whether that conduct can be considered acceptable for the executive director in charge of all staff in an organization.
	www.fasken.com /web/fmdwebsite.nsf/0/4d5288becbdaf65485256b37006120eb?opendocument (613 words)

	Ontario Court of Appeal Dismisses Appeal of Class Action Lawsuits by BCI Common Shareholders
		The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's decision dismissing the lawsuits as failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action.
		Gillespie appealed this decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal, which today dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's decision.
		BCI is operating under a court supervised Plan of Arrangement, pursuant to which BCI intends to monetize its assets in an orderly fashion and resolve outstanding claims against it in an expeditious manner with the ultimate objective of distributing the net proceeds to its shareholders and dissolving the company.
	www.bce.ca /en/news/releases/bco/2004/07/23/71468.html (496 words)

	Map of the Courts \| Legal Tools \| Ontario Women's Justice Network
		Appeals from decisions heard at this level of court go to the Superior Court of Justice.
		Appeals from trial heard under this court go the Ontario Court of Appeal.
		This court also deals with some types of appeals: those involving less than $25,000; from summary offenses heard in the Ontario Court of Justice; from the family court of the Ontario Court of Justice; and judicial review applications from provincial administrative tribunals.
	www.owjn.org /info/map.htm (681 words)

	Out In The Mountains : News - Ontario Courts Gay Marriage
		Thanks to an Ontario Court of Appeal decision, Canada has become the latest nation to affirm equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians, and the Canadian government has decided not to appeal that decision and similar decisions by courts in British Columbia and Quebec.
		The court ordered the legal definition of marriage to be changed to “the voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others” and ruled that any delay in implementation would be a denial of constitutional rights.
		The pressure on the federal government to legalize gay marriage is building with the Ontario Court of Appeal ruling and previous rulings in Quebec and British Columbia in favor of same sex marriage.
	mountainpridemedia.org /oitm/issues/2003/07jul2003/news03_ontario.htm (1137 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)