Ontario’s Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) in Conseil Scolaire Catholique Franco-Nord v. Nipissing, 2021 ONCA 544 opined on how contracts that do not specify a termination date or a procedure for termination ought to be interpreted. The ONCA grappled with the question of whether to treat a contract that was silent on the issue of termination as either (1) a perpetual contract, that does not end, or (2) a contract of indefinite duration, into which the court can imply a provision allowing for unliteral termination upon reasonable notice. Historical Approach The ONCA advised that courts used to presume that contracts which were indefinite in time were perpetual in nature. However, this approach was subsequently disregarded, and courts began to presume a right to terminate an indefinite contract by the provision of reasonable notice. New Approach The ONCA advised that even more recently, however, a contextual, fact-specific, approach has been favoured by … Read More
Contract Lawyers – The Duty of Good Faith – Update on Bhasin v Hrynew
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) recently released its decision in Wastech Services Ltd. v. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, 2021 SCC 7 (CanLII) which clarifies the operation of the duty to exercise contractual discretion in good faith described in the seminal case, Bhasin v. Hrynew, 2014 SCC 71 (CanLII), [2014] 3 SCR 494. The SCC confirms that where a party exercises a discretionary power under a contract, it must do so in good faith (meaning that parties must exercise their contractual duties honestly, reasonably, and not capriciously or arbitrarily). If a party violates the duty of good faith, the contract is breached. The SCC opined that the following question must be asked when deciding if a party breached the duty of good faith: Was the exercise of contractual discretion unconnected to the purpose for which the contract granted discretion? If the answer is yes, then the party has … Read More
Condo Arbitration, Condo Litigation, Condo Oppression Claims, and Piggybacking
As a Condo Dispute Arbitrator, I am very interested when the Court of Appeal for Ontario addresses an appeal concerning an arbitration clause in a condominium document and a motion to stay Superior Court proceedings in favour of arbitration. The Case In the very recent decision Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1628 v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1636, 2021 ONCA 360, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, allowed an appeal from the order of the motion judge dismissing the appellants’ motion to stay an application in favour of arbitration. The dispute concerned a cost-sharing agreement (“Reciprocal Agreement”), wherein the parties agreed to contribute to the costs of the operation and maintenance of defined Common Facilities. A dispute arose as to the amounts due under the Reciprocal Agreement, which contained this arbitration clause: “The validity, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Province … Read More
Domain Name Disputes, Counterfeit Websites, Fake Bad Reviews and Remedies
I discuss here a number of internet-based “dirty tricks” that competitors or others may deploy and which may have serious adverse consequences for you or your business. I also briefly mention the types of remedies which may be available to those victimized in this way. Confusingly Similar Domain Names In today’s modern web-based commercial world, it is more important than ever to ensure that potential customers and returning customers are properly connected with your website domain name, and to use domain names that are well-branded and associated with your business. It is not uncommon for competitors, cyber-squatters, or other persons to obtain control of domain names that are confusingly similar to your trademarks, business names, or your domain name. Then there is a real risk that users seeking your website are instead directed elsewhere by that confusingly similar domain name. Recovering a Domain Name In order to recover (transfer to … Read More
Shareholder’s Remedies
Shareholder Remedies Under the Ontario Business Corporations Act (“OBCA”), shareholders of a corporation have a variety of rights. Outlined below are a few rights that all shareholders should be aware they possess. Voting Rights The board of directors, under s. 115 are ultimately responsible for managing or supervising the management of the business and affairs of a corporation. Major business decisions also involve the participation of the board of directors, though sales, leases, or exchanges of all or substantially all the property of the corporation that is not in the ordinary course of business requires the approval of shareholders (s. 184(3)). Shareholders also have voting rights that allow them to control the makeup of the board of directors (s. 119(4)), and also the ability to remove directors under s. 122(1) (though this is subject to exceptions under s. 120(f)). Shareholders have additional voting rights under s. 100(2). Access to Information Rights Under s. 140(1) corporations … Read More
China International Arbitration Award Enforced by Ontario Court
Tianjin v. Xu, 2019 ONSC 628 (CanLII) involved an application under the International Commercial Arbitration Act, 2017, SO 2017, c 2, Sch 5 (the “Act”) for an order recognizing and making enforceable in Ontario an arbitral award of the Chinese International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (“CIETAC”). Respondent’s Defences The respondent argued that the arbitration award should not be enforced in Ontario because: Service: The respondent did not receive notice of the arbitral proceeding or the appointment of arbitrators; and Jurisdiction: The Ontario Superior Court of Justice did not have jurisdiction to enforce the arbitral award because the arbitration was not an “international commercial arbitration”. Service The court found that there is no requirement that service of notice of the arbitral proceedings or of appointment of arbitrators be effected in accordance with the CIETAC Rules. Rather, the court opined that the respondent was given “proper notice” of the proceedings and … Read More
Internet Harassment: New Tort Recognized in Ontario
Following up on our previous blog in which we advise that the Ontario Court of Appeal decided that there is no common law tort of harassment, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has now recognized the new tort of online harassment. In the recent decision, Caplan v. Atas, 2021 ONSC 670 (CanLII), the court recognized the inadequacies in the current legal system’s responses to internet defamation and harassment matters. The court opines that while defamation law and freedom of speech have created a balance in society which promotes both free democratic debate and protection of one’s reputation simultaneously, the internet has “cast that balance into disarray”. Recognition of the New Tort of Harassment The difficulty in the cases before the court was that the defendant was not deterred from further egregious conduct even in the face of multiple severe consequences. The defendant was also impecunious, so compensation was not a … Read More
B.C. Court Claims Jurisdiction over International Online Defamation Case
This blog post is further to our blog on the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) decision in Haaretz.com v. Goldhar, 2018 SCC 28 (CanLII) (“Haaretz”) wherein the SCC opined that Israel was a more convenient forum for an online defamation claim brought by the plaintiff in Ontario (even though the SCC recognized that Ontario had jurisdiction over the matter). The SCC considered a number of factors in its decision (all outlined in our blog). In the recent Supreme Court of British Columbia (“BCSC”) decision, Giustra v Twitter, Inc., 2021 BCSC 54 (CanLII) (“Giustra”), the BCSC confirmed that even where jurisdiction is found, a court can decline to exercise its jurisdiction under the principle that its court is not the most convenient forum for the hearing of the dispute (largely following the tenets laid out in Haaretz). The court in Giustra cited Haaretz in pointing out that the applicable law in … Read More
The Ontario Commercial Mediation Act, 2010 (Blog Part I)
David Alderson is a Commercial Mediator: Hourly Rates: $550.00 to $475.00 per hour (depending on amount of the claims), plus facilities and applicable taxes. Daily Rates and Half-day Rates available. The Ontario Commercial Mediation Act, 2010 (Blog Part I) This blog post (Part I) considers the provisions of the Ontario Commercial Mediation Act 2010, S.O. 2010, c.16, Sch. 3, concerning the application of that legislation, definitions contained in the Act, its interpretation, commencement and termination of the mediation, and the appointment of the mediator, duty of disclosure, and conduct of the mediation. Further blog posts on the Act: (Part II) – will consider other provisions of the Act, including the mediator’s authority, disclosure between parties, confidentiality, admissibility, and the relationship to arbitration and judicial proceedings. (Part III) – will consider other provisions of the Act concerning settlement agreements, enforcement of settlement, application of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, judgments, orders, … Read More
It’s not all about Intent! – Court of Appeal Confirms Test for Civil Conspiracy
In the recent decision Mughal v. Bama Inc., 2020 ONCA 704 (CanLII), the Court of Appeal upheld a lower court decision in an action alleging civil conspiracy, among other things. The underlying action involved a plaintiff seeking the return of his investment in a corporation. On appeal, it was alleged that the trial judge applied the wrong legal test for and misapprehended the evidence to find commission of the tort of conspiracy to injure. The appellate court concluded that the trial judge applied the correct test for establishing civil conspiracy to injure as follows: Whether the means used by the defendants are lawful or unlawful, the predominant purpose of the defendants’ conduct is to cause injury to the plaintiff; or, Where the conduct of the defendants is unlawful, the conduct is directed towards the plaintiff (alone or together with others), and the defendants should know in the circumstances that injury … Read More
Nick Poon Comments on Anti-Black Racism in Commercial Lease Dispute for The Lawyer’s Daily
Nick Poon was recently asked by The Lawyer’s Daily to comment on the Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision in Elias Restaurant v. Keele Sheppard Plaza Inc., 2020 ONSC 5457. The Lawyer’s Daily article is found here: Court cites ‘prejudices’ to Black tenants in overturning landlord’s eviction bid. In this case, the tenant was a husband and wife team that operated a successful restaurant/bar offering African and Caribbean cultural foods primarily to the black community. The tenant had spent $150,000 in leasehold improvements when it took over the lease in 2013. The lease included two further five-year renewal options, upon delivery of written notice at least six months before the lease expired. Although the tenant attempted to contact the landlord, both before and after the notice deadline, to start the renewal process, the landlord appeared to have avoided its telephone calls. The tenant brought an application for relief from forfeiture … Read More
Online Defamation and Use of Pseudonyms
Online Defamation (“Cyber Libel”) Many of our defamation matters come from the internet. These cases take many forms, from defamatory articles, to social media posts, to negative reviews of a business or person. Courts have recognized that online defamation or “cyber libel” is far more perverse than other forms of defamation. This is because internet users can reach the global population within seconds by publishing defamatory remarks about an individual or a business. As such, cyber libel can be significantly more damaging to a person’s business and/or reputation than other forms of defamation. Posting via Online Pseudonyms Some individuals go so far as to create aliases to post malicious and defamatory comments about others on the internet. In Ontario, you can sue an anonymous defamer by naming them as “John Doe” and/or “Jane Doe” in your claim against them. There are methods to determine the identity of these anonymous defamers, … Read More
Toronto Defamation Lawyers – Libel and Slander Law in Ontario
Defamation is the tort of false publication (whether written or oral). Typically, a publication which tends to lower a person’s reputation in the opinion of reasonable members of society, or to expose a person to hatred, contempt or ridicule, is defamatory and will attract liability. The major piece of legislation governing the law of defamation in Ontario is the Libel and Slander Act. According to the Act, you can be defamed in two ways: via either (1) Libel and/or (2) Slander. What is Libel? Defamatory communications may be by words, pictures, sounds, or other forms of communication. They may be published on the internet, in social media postings, on websites, online reviews, chat rooms, or in other forms of broadcast. The dissemination of such defamatory comments or communications to the public is libelous. What is Slander? Slander is the public utterance of words that are meant to disparage a person … Read More
Construction Arbitrator | Reasonable Hourly Rate | Good Availability
Construction arbitrators must be able to arbitrate efficiently and at the pace required by the parties, disputes ranging from simple renovations and repair, to complex multi-party multi-staged projects. The ability to understand construction stages and complexities of design, architecture, engineering and project management, and technical dimensions of a construction dispute are the hallmarks of an effective construction arbitrator. Sole Arbitrator – $450.00 per hour, plus HST Experience In his practice here in Ontario, and when practicing in Dubai and Bermuda, David has been involved in a wide array of construction disputes, including, but not limited to project development, project finance, infrastructure and construction disputes, including matters involving parking garages, road building, residential house construction and renovation, condo development and financing disputes, numerous joint venture disputes, matters involving demolition, collapse, fire and flood, as well as contract disputes concerning construction quality and warranties; and labour disputes in the construction industry. Arbitrator … Read More
Ontario Bans Commercial Evictions During COVID-19: Seven Things You Need to Know
As predicted in our previous blog, B.C. Bans Evictions if Commercial Landlords Fail to Apply to CECRA: A Similar Ban Coming to Ontario?, the Ontario Government announced yesterday that it had passed legislation to protect commercial tenants from evictions and having their assets seized by their landlord during COVID-19. After British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan took steps in the last two weeks to protect small business tenants from landlords that choose not to apply for the Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance (CECRA) program, Ontario Premier Doug Ford finally followed through on his promise to protect small business tenants during COVID-19. On June 18, 2020, Bill 192, Protecting Small Business Act, 2020 (the “Act”) received Royal Assent, and officially amended the Commercial Tenancies Act to prohibit landlords, that are or would be eligible to receive assistance under the CECRA program, from evicting tenants or exercising distress remedies in the period from … Read More
B.C. Bans Evictions if Commercial Landlords Fail to Apply to CECRA: A Similar Ban Coming to Ontario?
Although the Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance Program (CECRA) opened for applications last week, complaints about the program have continued from both small business tenants and commercial landlords. Small business tenants have complained that landlords continue to refuse to apply to CECRA, the eligibility requirement for a revenue loss of at least 70 percent was too high and the number of months of relief should be expanded. Today, Ontario extended the state of emergency until June 30, 2020 although Premier Doug Ford stressed that the gradual and safe re-opening of the economy would continue. It is unlikely most eligible tenants will be able to make their full rent payment on July 1, 2020, even if they receive rent relief for the months of April, May and June, 2020 under CECRA. Landlords have complained that the application process is too confusing, costly, time-consuming and risky. Under CECRA, landlords are required complete … Read More
Commercial Leases and Relief From Forfeiture: A Second Chance For Tenants During COVID-19?
Today is the first day landlords can apply for the Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance Program (CECRA) as reported in our blog last week entitled COVID-19 | Ontario-Canada Emergency Rent Assistance Program – Part 2. Although commercial rent relief is now finally available for the months of April, May and June 2020, it has been over two months since non-essential businesses in Ontario were required to close. The gradual re-opening of some non-essential businesses, under strict guidelines, was only announced over the last few weeks. According to a recent survey by CFIB, 48% of Ontario small businesses suffered a drop in revenue of 70% or more, and 77% of Ontario small businesses suffered a drop in revenue of 30% or more. It is highly unlikely that these small businesses will survive the COVID-19 pandemic without further assistance. In addition, it has been widely reported that some commercial landlords will not … Read More