Whither “Special Circumstances”?
UPDATE: A number of readers have inquired about the outcome of the motion in which our firm is involved and which is referred to in this post. The motion did begin, but the judge hearing it decided that he had a…
-
-
Master Says Communications with Paralegal Are Privileged (in this case, at least)
In what is apparently the first case to consider the issue, Master R. Dash has held that communications passing between a paralegal and his client were privileged from production in a civil action. The case is an interesting one, partly…
-
Impairment “Permanent”, “Important”, But Not “Serious”
In Kourtesis v. Joris, Mr. Justice Edward R. Brown dismissed an action for damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred during the “Bill 59” regime of the Insurance Act. He held that the plaintiff’s chronic pain injuries…
-
Insurer Owes No Duty to Defend Additional Named Insured When It is Already Defending Named Insured
Madam Justice Nancy M. Mossip has refused to order an insurer to undertake, in whole or in part, the defence of an additional named insured. She reasoned that since the insurer was already defending its named insured, there was no…
-
Jolly Jurist Juxtaposes Jocosely in Judgment
Mr. Justice David M. Brown hasn’t been a judge for very long (he was appointed to the Superior Court on September 14, 2006). Maybe he hasn’t lost his sense of humour. Or maybe the opposite is true: the job is…
-
Death Benefits Not Deductible from Tort Damages
In brief supplementary reasons, given in Wright v. Hannon (the original reasons for judgment can be accessed here), Mr. Justice Randall S. Echlin held (or perhaps “confirmed” would be a better word), that statutory accident death benefits are properly characterized as…
-
Defence Counsel Praised for High Quality of Work but Judge Says Law Clerks Should Have Been Used More
In 1175777 Ontario Limited v. Magna International Inc., Madam Justice Carolyn J. Horkins of the Ontario Superior Court had to fix costs following a 14-day trial in which she had found for the defendants. The plaintiff had sued Magna and…
-
C.A Says Underinsured Auto Endorsement Does Not Cover Accident in Jamaica
In Pilot Insurance Company v. Sutherland, the Court of Appeal (Justices Rosenberg, Gillese and Lang) allowed an appeal from a decision of Madam Justice Margaret Eberhard of the Superior Court. Her Honour had held that a territorial limitation contained in…
-
Settlement Agreements to be Evaluated Objectively, Not Subjectively: C.A.
In Olivieri v. Sherman et al., the Court of Appeal today allowed an appeal from a decision of Justice Colin Campbell, in which His Honour had refused to enforce a settlement of a defamation suit, involving claims for millions of…
-
Section 21 of Limitations Act, 2002 Doesn’t Permit Addition of Defendants After Prescription
In an important new decision, Mr. Justice George P. Smith has become the first judge (so far as we know) to consider in detail the effect of s. 21(1) of the Limitations Act, 2002. He has found that s. 21(1)…