1. a. Is there a tort of invasion of privacy in Canada? Explain.

b. If you answered "no" to question (a), how might a Canadian plaintiff obtain legal redress for an alleged invasion of privacy?

2. a. What is meant by the suggestion that courts have been conservative in applying the doctrine of intentional infliction of mental suffering?

b. What is the rationale for restricting the availability of recovery on the basis of intentional infliction of mental suffering?

3. Compare and contrast the torts of slander of goods and passing-off.

4. If the facts of a scenario may support either slander or libel, why might a plaintiff choose to frame his claim in libel?

5. Explain why there is a presumption of damages in the case of intentional torts, even where the harm done to the plaintiff is trifling or cannot be measured.

6. What evidence must be included in a pleading based on the tort of assault?

7. Why is the tort of malicious prosecution a rare one?

8. Define the tort of nuisance and identify some of the criteria that must be met for a nuisance to be actionable.

9. Identify the two forms of trespass to chattels and explain the difference between them.

Exercises

Below are three fact scenarios. Each notes a suggested cause of action in tort law. Each scenario, however, is missing one or more of the required elements to support the tort. Read each scenario and identify the missing element.

1. Malicious prosecution: Zach is angry at his neighbour Yoko over a dispute about who should pay for a fence between their two properties. Zach is aware that Yoko is a heavy drinker and often drives his car while impaired. One evening, after watching Yoko lurch unsteadily out of his house and down the steps, get in his car, and drive away, Zach phones the local police station and reports that he suspects that a driver with licence plate XXX XXX (Yoko's) is driving under the influence. Police arrest Yoko six blocks from his home. However, owing to a break in the chain of custody of the breathalyzer results, which clearly showed Yoko was impaired, the charges against Yoko are dropped.

2. Intentional infliction of mental suffering: Shannon is due to get married one week from now. Kristyn did not get asked to be a bridesmaid and her feelings were hurt. While out clubbing, Kristyn sees Shannon's fianc Tyler making out with another woman in a booth. Kristyn looks closer, and the "other woman" is Diana, one of the bridesmaids. Kristyn is delighted. She takes a picture of Tyler and Diana in flagrante delicto (in the act) on her cellphone camera and immediately forwards it to Shannon. Shannon breaks off the wedding. In the ensuing weeks, she falls into a depression and loses 20 pounds.

3. Passing-off: Joshua is a trend-spotter. He prides himself on picking up on trends early and capitalizing on them. While attending a fashion show in Milan in 2011, he notices that popular designer Herve Michel (fictional) is showing all his models for fall in fringed suede Inuit-style boots. Joshua contacts an Inuit craft collective in Nunavut and orders a shipment of similar boots. He creates posters from the photos he took of the Herve Michel collection in Milan. He rents a table at a local flea market, puts up his Herve Michel photos as a backdrop, and displays his suede boots for sale.

Fact Scenario

Pilon v Ontario, 2015 ONSC 7068

In April of 2014, Paul Pilon commenced an action against the Police Services Board and several police officers for damages arising out of two arrests occurring in July of 2010 and April of 2012. Pilon complained that his detention arising from the charge of criminal harassment in April of 2012 was without cause and that the arrest was unwarranted. The detention complained of by the plaintiff was for the period of time that he was held in custody pending the bail hearing. The plaintiff also claimed false arrest, misfeasance in public office, defamatory libel, invasion of privacy, trespass to chattels, malicious prosecution, negligent investigation, and intentional infliction of mental suffering against the police. Pilon entered into a peace bond to resolve the charge of criminal harassment.

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment on the basis that Pilon's claim regarding the arrest in April of 2012 was frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

1. Without knowing any of the details of the case with respect to the arrest in July of 2010, state one reason why that case cannot succeed.

2. What does Pilon need to set out in his Statement of Claim to support his claim of intentional infliction of mental suffering?

3. Should the court grant the motion of the police?