Category: Legal

Employment law is a complex area of law that governs the relationship between employers and employees. In Canada, employment law cases often deal with important legal issues such as discrimination, unjust dismissal, and the enforcement of employment contracts. The following sections discuss some of the most commonly studied cases in the employment law practice area by best employment lawyer Toronto.

Discrimination Law

Discrimination law deals with the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of various protected grounds such as race, gender, and sexual orientation. Some of the most famous discrimination law cases in Canadian history include:

• Robichaud v. Canada (Treasury Board) (1987)
• British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU (1999)
• Johnstone v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development) (2013)
• Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General) (1997)

Robichaud v. Canada (Treasury Board) (1987)

Robichaud v. Canada (Treasury Board) is a landmark case in Canadian discrimination law that dealt with the right to equal treatment in employment. The case involved a public servant who was subjected to workplace harassment on the basis of his language and accent. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the public servant’s rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated and that he was entitled to compensation.

British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU (1999)

British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU is a discrimination law case that dealt with the right to equal treatment in employment on the basis of gender. The case involved a female public servant who was denied a promotion because of her gender. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the public servant’s rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated and that she was entitled to compensation.

Johnstone v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development) (2013)

Johnstone v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development) is a discrimination law case that dealt with the right to equal treatment in employment on the basis of family status. The case involved a female public servant who was denied a flexible work arrangement because she had young children. The Federal Court of Canada held that the public servant’s rights under the Canadian Human Rights Act were violated and that she was entitled to compensation.

Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General) (1997)

Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General) is a discrimination law case that dealt with the right to equal treatment in the provision of government services. The case involved deaf individuals who were denied access to sign language interpretation services. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the individuals’ rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated and that they were entitled to compensation.

Unjust Dismissal Law

Unjust dismissal law deals with the protection of employees who have been unfairly terminated from their employment. Some of the most famous unjust dismissal law cases in Canadian history; well know by employment lawyer Toronto and the best employment lawyer in Toronto include:

• Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. (1997)
• Keays v. Honda Canada Inc. (2008)
• Machtinger v. HOJ Industries Ltd. (1992)

Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. (1997)

Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. is a landmark case in Canadian unjust dismissal law that established the principle of reasonable notice in termination of employment. The case involved an employee who was terminated without cause and without reasonable notice. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the employee

In Canadian injury law cases, there are several common defenses that defendants may raise in an effort to avoid liability. Some of the most commonly studied defenses include:

Contributory Negligence

One of the most commonly raised defenses in Canadian injury law cases is contributory negligence. This defense argues that the plaintiff was also negligent, and that their own actions contributed to the harm they suffered. For example, in a personal injury case involving a motor vehicle accident, a defendant may argue that the plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt, and that their failure to do so contributed to the extent of their injuries.

Assumption of Risk

Another common defense in best personal injury lawyer Toronto cases is assumption of risk. This defense argues that the plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risks associated with the activity in question, and that the defendant should not be held liable for harm that resulted from those risks. For example, in a personal injury case involving a recreational activity like skiing or rock climbing, a defendant may argue that the plaintiff assumed the risks associated with that activity.

Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations is another common defense in Canadian injury law cases. This defense argues that the plaintiff waited too long to file their claim, and that the defendant should not be held liable because the claim is barred by the statute of limitations. In Canada, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims varies depending on the jurisdiction and the type of claim.

Statutory Immunity

Statutory immunity is another defense that may be raised in Canadian injury law cases. This defense argues that the defendant is immune from liability because they are protected by a statute or regulation. For example, in a medical malpractice case, a defendant may argue that they are protected by immunity provisions in the relevant medical malpractice statute.

Causation

Finally, causation is a critical defense in Canadian injury law cases. This defense argues that the defendant’s actions did not cause the harm suffered by the plaintiff. For example, in a product liability case, a defendant may argue that the harm was not caused by the product, but by some other factor.

In conclusion, these are some of the most commonly studied defenses in Canadian injury law cases. Lawyers and legal professionals must have a strong understanding of these defenses in order to effectively represent their clients and resolve disputes. By understanding the defenses that may be raised, they can better prepare their cases and develop effective strategies for resolving disputes.

In Canada, law students, legal practitioners, and the judiciary are required to study a wide range of cases in order to understand the legal principles that govern various areas of law. The following sections discuss some of the most commonly studied cases in various legal practice areas in Canada.

Criminal Law

Criminal lawyer in Brampton, some of the most commonly studied cases involve important legal issues such as the right to counsel, the right to remain silent, and the right to a fair trial. Some of the most famous criminal law cases in Canadian history include:

• R. v. Oakes (1986)
• R. v. Morin (1992)
• R. v. Tyrell (1993)
• R. v. Latimer (2001)

R. v. Oakes (1986)

R. v. Oakes is a landmark case in Canadian criminal law that deals with the constitutionality of laws that infringe upon Charter rights. The case involved a challenge to a law that allowed for the forfeiture of property used in the commission of a drug offense. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the law was unconstitutional because it violated the principle of proportionality.

R. v. Morin (1992)

R. v. Morin is a criminal law case that deals with the right to counsel and the right to remain silent. The case involved a suspect who was questioned by police without having access to a lawyer. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the suspect’s rights were violated and that the evidence obtained during the questioning was inadmissible in court.

R. v. Tyrell (1993)

R. v. Tyrell is a criminal law case that deals with the right to a fair trial. The case involved a suspect who was tried for a crime based on circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to support a conviction and that the suspect was entitled to a fair trial.

R. v. Latimer (2001)

R. v. Latimer is a criminal law case that deals with the crime of murder. The case involved a father who was convicted of killing his daughter, who had a severe and incurable disability. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the father’s actions constituted murder and that he was not entitled to a defense of necessity.
best criminal lawyer Brampton has present in their firms those cases.

Civil Law

In civil law, some of the most commonly studied cases involve important legal issues such as contract law, tort law, and property law. Some of the most famous civil law cases in Canadian history include:

• Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)
• Re BCE Inc. (2008)
• Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Transportation and Highways) (2010)
• Wall v. Dudley (1948)

Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)

Donoghue v. Stevenson is a landmark case in Canadian tort law that established the modern law of negligence. The case involved a woman who drank a bottle of ginger beer that contained a dead snail. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the manufacturer of the ginger beer was liable for the woman’s injuries because it had failed to take reasonable care to ensure the product was safe for consumption.

Re BCE Inc. (2008)

Re BCE Inc. is a corporate law case that deals with the rules governing takeovers and mergers of Canadian corporations. The case involved a proposed takeover of BCE Inc., one of Canada’s largest corporations. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the proposed takeover was permissible under Canadian law.