ONSC on service to Google

by | Feb 11, 2022 | Caselaw, Civil Litigation, Decision of the Week

Google reviews – you either love ’em or hate ’em. Negative reviews can do unimaginable harm to your reputation and there is often little you can do to remove them. One company in Ontario, however, is trying to do just that. This Pre-Claim Injunction explains the interaction between Rules 37.17 and 16.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure in determining whether email notification is acceptable as personal service.

[17]           In most cases, I would not be satisfied that when Myers J. sent the motion back to Obsidian’s counsel to be brought “on notice”, he meant notice by something other than the personal service required for an originating process. This was, after all, the first missive in this action (or proposed action) that Google, as defendant, would have received. However, Google is an unusual respondent in certain respects, and its uniqueness may impact on the way in which the ambiguity between Rule 16.01 and Rule 37.17 is interpreted.

Since Google has three dedicated email addresses dealing with litigation, Morgan, J. accepted that notice had been given. The interim injunction and Norwich Order sought was granted.

Obsidian Group Inc. v. Google LLC, 2022 ONSC 848

New Book display: Legal Horrors

by | Oct 9, 2020 | Book Display, Civil Litigation, Real Estate Law

Now that’s it’s October, Halloween isn’t far behind. If you are looking for some scary cases to read, check out about what happens when a seller doesn’t disclose a possible poltergeist in 1784773 Ontario Inc. v. K-W Labour Assn. Inc., 2013 ONSC 5401, 2013 CarswellOnt 13500. Or, find out if it’s slander to claim specters haunt a North End home in Nagy v. Manitoba Free Press Co., 1907 CanLII 193 (MB CA)

Take a look at some of the texts the library has to offer to help with any legal nightmares

· Legal responsibilities of real estate agents — 3rd ed. By Rosemary Bocska and Martin K.I. Rumack

· Caveat emptor and the pros and cons of greater sellers’ disclosure  CPD

· 2019 hot topics in real estate (Stigmatized property) CPD

· The law of libel in Canada — 4th ed. Peter A. Downard

· Brown on Defamation

Also be sure to check out this article on HeinOnline about a case where a house was legally declared haunted.

Keep reading for some tips on finding related resources for titles like; AIDS, Ghosts, Murder: Must Real Estate Brokers and Sellers Disclose, or Caveat Spiritus: A Jurisdictional Reflection upon the Law of Haunted Houses and Ghosts

Decision of the Week – S. 2(b) Charter Challenge

by | Nov 20, 2019 | Charter, Civil Litigation, Decision of the Week

This decision by Lanchbery, J. concerns the right of Manitoba Public Insurance to cancel a personalized licence plate (PLP) after allowing the respondent to display it for almost two years. The slogan on the licence plate was based on characters from Star Trek.

[88]      The question before me, is the limit of s. 2(b) rights on PLPs for the purpose to “eliminate the inappropriate/possibly offensive slogans”, reasonable.

Troller v. Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation, 2019 MBQB 157

The parties agreed that the decision to revoke the PLP is a discretionary administrative act of the Registrar (para. 81). Lanchbery, J. found that Charter protections are engaged, but further analysis showed that the actions of MPIC were reasonable.

One interesting fact that came out of this was that MPIC uses the Urban Dictionary as one of its sources to determine whether a potential PLP is offensive.

Decision of the Week: Oppression

by | Feb 8, 2019 | Business Law, Civil Litigation, Decision of the Week

This week’s decision concerns an application for an oppression remedy: Caughlin v. Canadian Payroll Systems Inc., 2019 MBQB 6.

Caughlin … alleges that the conduct of Lyle and CPS has been oppressive and unfairly prejudicial and that there has been an unfair disregard for his interests. Caughlin seeks a remedy to address the inequitable conduct and activities of Lyle and CPS.

Para. 3

As noted by Harris, J., s. 234(2) of The Corporations Act, C.C.S.M. c. C225 explains the grounds for seeking an oppression remedy, and the leading case is BCE Inc. v. 1976 Debentureholders, 2008 SCC 69.

New Practice Direction – Scheduling of Civil Motions

by | Jan 18, 2019 | Civil Litigation, Court of Queen's Bench, Practice Directions

Effective immediately, the Civil Motion Coordinator (Cheryl Laniuk) is to be contacted (phone number – 204-945-3043) regarding the scheduling of all civil motions, including those returnable on the civil uncontested list, contested motions and seized motions.

Coming into effect

This Practice Direction comes into effect immediately.

Original notice available here.

Please note: The library will be closing early on Friday, December 13th at 11:00AM for a special event.  Regular library service will resume Monday, December 16th at 8:30AM.

The Great Library will be closed from December 25, 2024 to January 1, 2025 for the winter holidays. Regular office hours will resume on Thursday, January 2, 2025.