Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:51:32

From: Jason Neyers

Subject: SCC grants leave in 2 torts cases

Dear Colleagues:

Vaughan has informed me that one of the grounds of appeal in the Hanke case is whether "the Alta. C.A. erred in applying distributive justice?". The case should be interesting if only to see what the SCC makes of that error of appeal.

Cheers,

----- Original Message -----
From: Vaughan Black
Date: Thursday, April 27, 2006 12:42 pm
Subject: ODG: SCC grants leave in 2 torts cases

Today the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave to appeal in two interesting torts cases. One was the decision of a 5-judge Ontario Court of Appeal in Hill v. Hamilton Wentworth Police (2005), 76 O.R. (3d) 481. There all members of the court agreed that the police could be sued for negligent investigation. The majority of 3 agreed with the trial judge that the police had lived up to their duty in this case, while the 2 dissenters thought they had not and that the plaintiff should succeed. The plaintiff/appellant is someone who was charged with a bank robbery and acquitted. He claimed that had the cops done their job he would never have been charged. I think this will be the first time the SCC addresses the issue of the duty (and standard) of care of police to conduct non-negligent criminal investigations.

The second leave was from the decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal in Hanke v. Resurfice Corp. and mainly raises issues of causation -- specifically the so-called material contribution test. It's about time the SCC made an effort to sort that one out. David Cheifetz and I have a comment on the Alta. C.A.'s decision in the current issue of the Canadian Business Law Journal (vol. 43, p. 155). I could email a copy of the comment to anyone who wants one.

--
Jason Neyers
January Term Director
Assistant Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
University of Western Ontario
N6A 3K7
(519) 661-2111 x. 88435

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>