Full Decision The Ontario Divisional Court reminds legal professionals of their professional obligations with respect to advocacy. The single most important task of the litigator is to marshal and present the facts by admissible evidence to prove their case. Lawyers must never knowingly misstate facts. A lawyer must not assert as true a fact that cannot reasonably be supported by the evidence admitted in the …
The recent Court of Appeal decision in Crete v. Ottawa Community Housing Corporation confirmed that the landlord was not liable for damages caused by a slip and fall on ice in a townhouse complex in an area used exclusively by individual tenants, where the lease required the tenant to clear snow and ice.
The plaintiff successfully resisted a motion to compel her to attend a further defence medical examination after the deadline to serve expert reports had passed.
The Divisional Court allowed an appeal from a decision of the LAT, finding that the Tribunal’s decision was procedurally unfair
In Denman v. Radovanovic, the Ontario Court of Appeal unanimously upheld the trial judge’s decision to find all three defendant physicians liable for failing to obtain Mr. Denman’s informed consent to an elective and multi-step plan of medical intervention to cure Mr. Denman’s brain arteriovenous malformation (“AVM”). This summary will focus on five key takeaways from the Court of Appeal’s decision, written by Rouleau J.A.
In November 2017, J.E. was walking on a sidewalk in Waterloo when he was injured by a bus stop sign that was protruding into his path. He claimed damages for injuries including concussion, depression and anxiety. In 2023, J.E. was subsequently hospitalized, diagnosed with and treated for schizophrenia.
