Chapter Case - Chapter 1

Case #1:Isen v. Simms S.C.C., 2006 SCC 41; [2006] 2 S.C.R. 349

Mr. Isen was the owner of a 17-foot pleasure boat. After a day of boating on the lake and loading the boat on its trailer in preparation for transporting it on the highway was securing the boat with the help of Dr. Simms. Mr. Isen was stretching a bungee cord over the engine when it slipped and hit Dr. Simms causing an eye injury. He and his wife sued in the Ontario Superior Court for $2.2 million. Mr. Isen brought an application before the federal court for a declaration that the federal maritime law applied and the Canada Shipping Act imposed a $1 million limitation on damages in this situation.

Plaintiff's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Defense's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Risk Mitigation (Defense):

1. _
2. _
3. _

Case #2: Ramsden v. Peterborough (City) [1993] 2 S.C.R. 1094, 106 D.L.R. (4th) 233 (SCC)

This is a classic case dealing with freedom of expression. The City of Peterborough had passed a bylaw prohibiting the posting of any material on city property. The bylaw prohibited the posting of "any bill, poster or other advertisement of any nature," on any "tree . . . pole, post, stanchion or other object . . ." within the city limits. Ramsden put up advertising posters on several hydro poles to advertise an upcoming concert for his band. He was charged with committing an offence under the bylaw. It is not disputed that he posted the bills on the hydro pole.

Plaintiff's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Defense's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Risk Mitigation (Defense):

1. _
2. _
3. _

Case #3: Lawton's Drug Stores Ltd. v. Mifflin (1995) 402 A.P.R. 33, 38 C.P.C. (3d) 135, 129 Nfld. & P.E.I. R. 33 (Nfld. T.D.)

When Mifflin sold their business to Lawton's Drug Stores, the contract included a clause restricting them from opening a similar business in competition. Lawton's had paid extra for customer goodwill, which would be lost if Mifflin were to start up a business in competition and recapture that customer loyalty. Six months later Mifflin did open up a business in competition, and Lawton's sued for breach of contract. As part of the pre-trial discovery process, Lawton's demanded a copy of Mifflin's customer list. Such lists are extremely confidential and must be kept out of the hands of competitors at all costs, so Mifflin refused.

Plaintiff's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Defense's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Risk Mitigation (Defense):

1. _
2. _
3. _

Case #4:Consolidated Fastfrate Inc. v. Western Canada Council of Teamsters S.C.C., 2009 SCC 53; 2009; 313 D.L.R. (4th) 285

Consolidated Fastfrate operated a freight-forwarding business with branches across Canada. Their business consisted of picking up freight in one province, consolidating it into containers, arranging for transportation to the destination province, and distributing that freight to various locations in the province. The business was managed and rates set at a regional or national level. The branch employees did not cross provincial boundaries, and third-party carriers transferred the containers between branches. A union representing the employees in branches in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba applied to the Canada Industrial Labour Relations Board for certification, and in this action the union was applying for a declaration whether the employees should be federally or provincially certified.

Plaintiff's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Defense's Argument:

1. _
2. _
3. _

Risk Mitigation (Defense):

1. _
2. _
3. _