519 672 2121
Close mobile menu
Published on: 7 Feb 2018 By

Concerned Beneficiary? Court Finds Will Challenges Must Have Minimal Evidentiary Basis

The recent decision in Seepa v Seepa, 2017 ONSC 5368 contains observations that may have an impact on future Will challenges under Rule 75.06 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and in particular, on the materials that must be placed before the court in the “Motion for Directions”, which typical…

View the post titled Concerned Beneficiary? Court Finds Will Challenges Must Have Minimal Evidentiary Basis
Published on: 7 Feb 2018 By

Follow the Bouncing Ball: Enforcing Termination Provisions

Employers need some good news these days, with rising minimum wages, employee-friendly changes to many employment standards, and let’s not even mention the stock market. So I’m happy to share the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Nemeth v. Hatch Ltd. in which a very simple terminati…

View the post titled Follow the Bouncing Ball: Enforcing Termination Provisions
Published on: 5 Feb 2018 By

What Does it Take to be a Representative Plaintiff in a Class Proceeding?

In most class actions, class counsel represent class members in Court. One class member, the “representative plaintiff,” has important responsibilities with special duties to absent class members. Ontario’s class proceeding legislation requires that each class action have a representative pl…

View the post titled What Does it Take to be a Representative Plaintiff in a Class Proceeding?
Published on: 19 Jan 2018 By

Tactics used by insurers are “borderline harassment”

Arbitrator Musson, in the recent decision SP and RBC Insurance, reviewed the conduct of Aviva Insurance (who bought out RBC Insurance) in adjusting an injury claim made by a young woman hurt in a motor vehicle collision. The decision concluded with a comment upon the behaviour and conduct of…

View the post titled Tactics used by insurers are “borderline harassment”