Menu
Call Us Today
416-616-5628
Blog

Victim of Racial Profiling by Police obtains a $10,000 award of damages at the Human Rights Tribunal

By Uncategorized

The recent case of Joseph Briggs, a child and youth care student arbitrarily detained by the Durham police, in what the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has called a case of racial profiling, showcases the violations of human rights faced by minority individuals in the GTA, as well as the urgent need for reform of the policing culture in Ontario. Mr. Briggs, was detained after deciding to have a quick meal at his local Subway restaurant following a long study session when police officers decided to check the plates of his car with the police database and mistakenly believed that…

Read More

Quebec Human Rights Tribunal: Racist remarks towards tenants will not be tolerated

By Uncategorized

A recent decision of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal underscores the need for tenants to be treated equally and fairly by landlords, regardless of their religion and ethnicity. After fours years of constant harassment by the superintendent of the apartment building where he resided with his son, Mohamed Azzedine Tighrine finally obtained justice last week, with the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal ordering a total of $13,000 in damages for discrimination on the basis of religion, sexuality and ethnicity. “He feels confused, belittled, humiliated and offended,” Judge Rosemarie Millar said in his judgment. For four years Mr. Tighrine has been subject…

Read More

Piercing the Corporate Veil, Personal Liability of Directors in Employment Contracts

By Uncategorized

In its recent decision, Mainieri v Kajotec Inc. et al., the Superior Court of Justice awarded an employee $25000 in damages after finding that he was induced to enter into an employment contract as a result of fraudulent misrepresentation by the corporation’s sole director, Joel Kaleu. FACTS Prior to hiring Mr. Mainieri, Kaleu informed the Plaintiff that his company was operating in the eco-products industry and selling various products listed on a website with corresponding patent numbers. Based on these representations, the Plaintiff entered into a six-month employment contract with a $30,000 salary. Shortly after, the Plaintiff found that Kajotec…

Read More

Insurers who bully their customers will be held liable says court in Branco v American Home Assurance Company et al.

By Uncategorized

We might be told that the “peace of mind” that we buy when purchasing insurance is priceless, but for Mr. Branco submitting a claim was just the beginning of an almost 15 year old battle that ended last month. Mr. Branco, a Canadian citizen who was originally from Portugal took a job at a mine site in Kyrgyzstan with a subsidiary of Cameco Corporation of Saskatchewan. He was an exemplary welder and employee with a perfect attendance record. Through his employment, Mr. Branco had insurance with American Home Assurance Company (AIG), which provided him with benefits similar to worker compensation…

Read More

Highest to Date Damages Awarded for Sexual Harassment in OPT v Presteve Foods LTD

By Uncategorized

Recently the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) released a landmark decision that sends a strong message to employers. [1] In the face of the respondent’s conduct, which the Tribunal called “unprecedented”, the complainants were awarded by far the largest general damages awards, ever given by a human rights tribunal in Canada. This award is almost three times greater than the highest order given by the HRTO and demonstrates that serious and persistent breaches of the Human Rights code will have substantial financial consequences. The decision will hopefully set a general trend of increased damage awards across the board. Presteve Foods, the…

Read More

A Very Long Limitation Period for Unjust Enrichment Claims in McConnell v Huxtable

By Uncategorized

Under the Limitations Act, the time limit for bringing most types of proceedings is two years, but there are exceptions. A recent decision of the Court of Appeal has created a surprisingly long limitation period of ten years for unjust enrichment claims involving real property. That can have significant implications for former common law spouses long after their relationship has ended (and long after evidence related to the case has been lost).

Read More

The Supreme Court Gives a Green Light to Summary Judgment in Hryniak v Mauldin

By Uncategorized

Under the Limitations Act, the time limit for bringing most types of proceedings is two years, but there are exceptions. A recent decision of the Court of Appeal has created a surprisingly long limitation period of ten years for unjust enrichment claims involving real property. That can have significant implications for former common law spouses long after their relationship has ended (and long after evidence related to the case has been lost).

Read More
Scroll To Top