videos

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving the power of courts to order lawyers to continue acting for clients. In a class action related to vaccine litigation, a lawyer filed a notice of discontinuance that removed certain plaintiffs from the case. Those plaintiffs later applied to have their claims reinstated, arguing that they had not consented to the discontinuance. The court reinstated the claims and went further, ordering the same lawyer who had filed the discontinuance to continue acting for them. The lawyer objected, arguing that communication problems and professional obligations created an ethical conflict that made it impossible to continue representing the clients. The Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the appeal.

…

Ordering Lawyers to Act: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case about delay in civil proceedings and the consequences of failing to advance a lawsuit. In a dispute between two companies, a claim was filed in court but no steps were taken to move the case forward for nine years. As a result, the court dismissed the action for delay. The plaintiff applied to have the dismissal set aside, arguing that the result was unjust, but that request was denied. The decision was upheld on appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the case.

…

Delay in Civil Matters: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving internet defamation and the constitutional limits of permanent court ordered restrictions on speech. After an unpleasant experience at a coffee shop, a customer engaged in a sustained and targeted online campaign against a specific location. The conduct included repeated negative reviews, the creation of fake profiles, and continued postings across multiple platforms over a long period of time. A court initially issued an injunction to stop the behaviour. When that injunction was breached, the court imposed a permanent injunction prohibiting the individual from ever expressing opinions about the business again. The Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the appeal.

…

Online Defamation: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation unpacks a case involving a police search of a computer that raised major privacy concerns. The accused, facing charges related to online conduct, challenged the broad scope of a search conducted on his seized devices. He argued there should be a distinction between the authority to seize a computer and the authority to conduct a full forensic search of its digital contents. The Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the case.

…

Computer Searches: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation explores a case out of Saskatchewan that challenged the constitutionality of mandatory alcohol screening. After being required to provide a breath sample without any suspicion of impairment, the accused argued that this random breath testing violated Charter rights. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal was split on the decision, with one judge finding the law unconstitutional. Despite the national impact of mandatory screening, the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the case.

…

Mandatory Alcohol Screening: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

…

Discrimination in Child Protection Laws: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving a defamation lawsuit between a home building company and dissatisfied homeowners. After the homeowners posted negative reviews online, the company sued for defamation. The homeowners responded by seeking to have the case dismissed under British Columbia’s anti-SLAPP legislation, arguing that their posts constituted expression on a matter of public interest. The Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the case, leaving open significant questions about how far anti-SLAPP protections extend in private disputes.

…

Defamation: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving an arrest for obstruction in the context of a routine traffic enforcement encounter. A person who was pulled over for a regulatory traffic matter—such as speeding or running a red light—was arrested for obstruction when they attempted to leave. Although the trial judge found the arrest unlawful, the Court of Appeal reversed that decision. The Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the case, leaving unresolved questions about the scope of police powers in regulatory versus criminal contexts.

…

Obstruction of a Police Officer: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation explores a case challenging a provincial Airbnb ban. The applicant, who operated multiple short-term rentals, argued that the new licensing regime violated his Charter rights—specifically, his right to equality under section 15. While the courts rejected the claim and the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the case, it raised important questions about the intersection of economic participation, immutable characteristics, and evolving forms of work in the gig economy.

…

Airbnb Bans: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »