Public Schools Cannot Just “Kick Kids Out” – They Must Have A Full Expulsion Hearing It may seem obvious, but School Principals cannot expel students without actually expelling them. In Ontario, allowing children access to a publicly funded education is a fundamental value. Children should not be deprived of that education, except in extreme circumstances. To deprive a child of the ability to attend school, the principal and the Board must follow the rules and procedures for expelling students. Unfortunately, often School Principal’s take short cuts, which are illegal, to kick kids out of school. Expelling students is hard. There are lots of rules to follow and students have rights in the process. Unfortunately, principals often try to kick students out of school without actually expelling them. The law says that is not allowed. To start, principals cannot kick a student out of school because the student is difficult to teach, has challenging or complicated special needs, has difficult parents or other family members, hangs out with the wrong people or is from a bad neighbourhood. Children can only be expelled if they commit very serious offences either while at school or in an activity that is closely linked to school. Those offences are set out in section 310 of the Education Act. They are as follows: Possessing a weapon, including possessing a firearm. Using a weapon to cause or to threaten bodily harm to another person. Committing physical assault on another person that causes bodily harm requiring treatment by a medical practitioner. Committing sexual assault. Trafficking in weapons or in illegal drugs. Committing robbery. Giving alcohol to a minor. Bullying, if, the pupil has previously been suspended for engaging in bullying, and the pupil’s continuing presence in the school creates an unacceptable risk to the safety of another person. Any activity for which a student might be suspended (such a threatening to cause bodily harm, vandalism, being under the influence of alcohol or drugs or bullying) that is motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or any other similar factor. Any other activity that, under a policy of a board, is an activity for which a principal must suspend a pupil If the student’s behaviour does not constitute one of the above offences or was not committed at school or can be linked to school, then neither the principal nor the School Board can expel the student. Further, before expelling a student, Ontario Regulation 474/07 requires that both a principal and school board consider whether the student’s behaviour is the result of identified special needs – especially if the school has not been accommodating those needs properly, whether the student has been a victim of bullying or harassment and what effect the discipline will have on the student’s education. These factors MAY make it impossible to expel a student. The whole process of expelling a student can be very inconvenient. It should be impossible to kick a student out of school because his or her special needs are difficult to accommodate. There are lots of students who can really irritate teachers, but who knows the rules and don’t do anything to get themselves expelled Sometimes a student is weird, or unpopular, or “different”, or does not reflect well on the school. In all these cases, the expulsion process does to work because the school has no basis in law to expel a student. In those circumstances, where a student’s actions do not allow them to be expelled, principals have taken to just giving students a “Trespass Notice” and telling them that they are not allowed to come onto school grounds anymore. Sometimes, the principal also threatens to call the police if the student tries to come to school. The principal will say that section 265(1)(m) of the Education Act gives a principal the authority to take such action. Indeed, section 265(1)(m) does give the principal of the school the authority to “refuse to admit to the school or classroom a person whose presence in the school or classroom would in the principal’s judgment be detrimental to the physical or mental well-being of the pupils.” The principal does not have to hold a hearing, or follow any set procedure before doing this. Unlike for suspensions, which can only be for 20 days, there is no time limit for how long a person can be denied admittance to the school. There are no other obligations imposed on the principal who refuses to admit someone, except to allow that person to appeal the principal’s decision to the School Board. However, there is no timeline for the hearing of such an appeal. Principals cannot use section 265(1)(m) against their students. Section 3(3) of Ontario Regulation 474/00 says that a principal cannot refuse to admit a student into a school if the student is enrolled as a pupil at that school. To be clear, it is illegal for a principal to refuse to admit a student into the school at which that student is enrolled. It is also a illegal for a principal to issue a “Trespass Notice” to a student in relation to that student’s own school. A principal cannot use a “refusal to admit” or an “exclusion” as a substitute for an expulsion. Parents of students who have been “excluded” should challenge that decision immediately, which may mean an application to the Child and Family Services Review Board. In its decision in DN v. TDSB, a case in which John Schuman was counsel for the parents and student, the Child and Family Services Review Board both commented on the illegality of a principal “excluding” a student from his or her own school, and gave parents and students recourse when a principal does that. In that case, the CFSRB decided that an “exclusion” of a student from his own school was really an expulsion and should be treated as such. For that reason, the CFSRB decided it could hear the student’s appeal of the principal’s decision as if it had been an expulsion. This is important because the CFSRB is not only an objective tribunal that is completely separate from the school board, but also, it hears appeals within 30 days while a School Board can hear an appeal of a “refusal to admit” whenever it feels like it. The CFSRB also commented that if a child is suspended for more than 20 days, the Board looses the right to expel a student. If a principal uses section 265(1)(m) to prevent a student from attending school, that student and his parents should immediately file an appeal to the Child and Family Services Review Board. The CFRSRB is a formal tribunal, with its own procedural rules, and that conducts hearings that look very similar to a trial in court, with live witnesses and legal arguments. For that reason, parents may want to consult with an education lawyer prior to starting the appeal. It may be important to do that as principals and school boards can let “exclusions” go on for months, causing a student to lose his or her year, and perhaps fall out of he education system entirely, before the matters resolved. If a school board cannot meet a child’s special needs within a particular school, including the child’s home school, the school board is allowed to move the child to a school that can better meet a student’s needs. However, the Board must go through the IPRC process to identify the student’s special needs and determine the appropriate school placement. Ontario Regulation 181/98 says parents are entitled to participate in that process… it cannot happen behind the parent’s backs. Other than that, a child can only be removed from or transferred out of a public school with the parent’s consent (or with the child’s consent when the child is old enough to give it.) Schools, school board’s and principals cannot just tell a student that he or she cannot come to school anymore. John Schuman is the education lawyer who represented the parents in DN v. TDSB (and other important education law cases like this one). He has helped get many many students back into school with the services they need. To arrange a consultation with him, at a reduced hourly rate, call 416-446-5869 or use the form below. We try to answer all inquiries promptly as we know it is important to get kids back in school. Contact with us is protected by solicitor-client privilege. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Education LawJanuary 3, 2018July 5, 2023
Uber Data Breach Affecting 815,000 Canadians, Investigation Launched As much of the world has heard, Uber has had a data breach that affected people worldwide. Now, after several demands from a number of levels of Canadian governments, Uber finally disclosed that 815,000 Canadians were affected by this breach, resulting in the Canadian Privacy Commissioner opening a formal investigation into the breach. Uber has said that only names, emails and mobile phone numbers were taken by the hackers and that no credit card information, bank accounts or dates of birth were compromised. Unlike the U.S. and U.K., Canada has no laws in place requiring Uber to disclose data breaches and under the license agreement with the city of Toronto, the city council had to vote in order to demand information on the breach. The Privacy Commissioner “gave little detail in announcing the formal investigation, noting confidentiality provisions under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA)”. PIPEDA entitles individuals to certain protections for personal information that is collected in the course of commercial activity. “Personal information” is broadly defined by PIPEDA, and includes any information about an identifiable person (s 2). “Commercial activity” is also broadly defined and includes: any particular transaction, act or conduct or any regular course of conduct that is of a commercial character, including the selling, bartering or leasing of donor, membership or other fundraising lists (s. 2). These sections form the basis of the protection of personal information under federal law. When a complaint is filed with the Commission, PIPEDA confers wide-ranging investigative powers to the Commissioner to investigate alleged breaches, make corrective orders to organizations, and assign penalties if a breach is found. Luckily, to address the lengthy process required to obtain information from businesses such as Uber, Federal privacy laws are being developed that would require businesses to disclose if a data breach occurs. Under the revision, the Privacy Commissioner would be limited to issuing a maximum fine of $100,000 for not disclosing a breach. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Intellectual PropertyJanuary 3, 2018June 17, 2020
Fair Insurance Act The Ontario Liberal government, just prior to an election, claims it has again decided to address high automobile insurance premiums (but ignores the negative effect of these changes on victims of car accidents). In the 2017 Ontario Ministry of Finance Report “Fair Benefits Fairly Delivered: A Review of the Auto Insurance System of Ontario” the average yearly rates for car insurance by province were: Ontario: $1,458 C.: $1,316 Alberta: $1,179 Newfoundland & Labrador: $1,090 Manitoba: $1,001 Northwest Territories: $974 Nunavut: $968 Yukon: $806 Nova Scotia: $783 Saskatchewan: $775 New Brunswick: $763 E.I.: $755 Quebec: $724. The Liberal government, which has historically taken away benefits and protection from victims with empty promises of keeping car insurance rates affordable (I have never seen any reduction in car insurance the last few years, have you?), has created smoke and mirrors and called it The Fair Auto Insurance Plan. This plan is supposed to “improve care, reduce disputes around diagnosis and treatment… promote innovation, competition and other steps to improve consumer protection.” The plan creates a fancy title for investigation of alleged fraud “The Serious Fraud Office” which is to be operational by the spring of 2018. Call me sceptical but insurers have appropriately and successfully cut out all fraud from car insurance for years, so is this the Premier’s excuse why her promises regarding reducing car insurance premiums never worked out? (although they did cut off perhaps 50% of the benefits desperately needed for victims and greatly increased profits of the auto insurers). The Fair Auto Insurance Plan will also introduce: Standard treatment plans for immediate care on common injuries: sprains, whiplash, etc. (Ask yourself how “common” your injuries are when you are so inflicted). Independent examination centres for more serious collision victims aimed to reduce diagnosis disputes, reduce system costs and inefficiencies (Historically “independent” examination centres are insurer biased). Insurance Act to be given “greater teeth” to protect consumers (Consumer benefit has never been the intention behind changes since 1990- ask any personal injury lawyer). These promised changes have elements that have been used in previous car insurance regimes that have all failed, yet before election promises are being made to protect consumers! The only protection for consumers in the car insurance industry is to acquire optional benefits from your insurance broker to better protect you and your family and to ask a personal injury lawyer whether your coverage is adequate before it is too late! For more information please contact Personal Injury lawyer Marc Spivak by email marc.spivak@devrylaw.ca or phone 416-446-5855. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Insurance Defence, Personal InjuryDecember 19, 2017July 5, 2023
Facts about Bill C-45, Canada’s Proposed New Cannabis Act – Still More Questions than Answers? Bill C-45 (An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts), also known as Canada’s proposed Cannabis Act, recently passed third reading in Canada’s House of Commons and has been forwarded to Canada’s Senate for approval. Although Bill C-45 in its current form answers many of the questions regarding the future regulation of Canada’s existing medical and new recreational cannabis industries, the proposed rules remains uncertain given that many Senators have indicated that they intend to carefully review the draft legislation and perhaps propose changes rather than adding a rubber stamp to the version of the bill tabled by the House. Some Senators have even hinted that they are not necessarily committed to the July 1, 2018, legalization date proposed by the House of Commons. Adding to all of this uncertainty is the fact that many of the important legislative issues surrounding the regulation of cannabis do not even fall under the proposed Act itself but rather, will be addressed by regulations to the Act. So far, only a limited amount of information regarding these proposed regulations is available. In late November, the Canadian Government released a Consultation Paper detailing the Government’s position on many of these issues such as: The proposed new licensing regime for cannabis producers and sellers Requirements for packaging and labeling of cannabis products, and; Regulation relating to the different classes of products that will be permitted to be sold (dried, seeds, oils, edibles etc.). Although the Consultation Paper provides some guidance, the final rules on these issues will not be settled until after the consultation period has been completed in early 2018. Moreover, except for the report authored by the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation which was tabled over a year ago, the government’s position on several key issues have yet to be addressed at all. One of the most significant unknowns is the Government’s final position on regulations restricting the marketing and advertising of cannabis products, an issue which will be vitally important to the numerous producers who have been jockeying for position in their efforts to service the new recreational market in the summer of 2018. All of this uncertainty at the Federal level is making it very difficult for the provinces, who are charged with the implementation of these new Federal rules, to pass their own provincial legislation which is necessary to supplement the Federal framework. For more information or to speak to a Cannabis Law lawyer, please visit our Cannabis Law practice page and contact one of our lawyers listed. For any other inquiries, please contact our office directly at (416) 449-1400. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Cannabis LawDecember 13, 2017June 17, 2020
National Housing Strategy On Wednesday, November 23, Justin Trudeau announced the federal government’s 10 year national housing strategy. The federal housing strategy is aimed at ensuring that Canadians have access to affordable homes. The aim is to reduce poverty and homelessness. Trudeau deemed access to adequate housing as a “human right”. The federal government is hoping to make a systematic change that will have lasting effects. The federal government has made a $11.2 billion commitment to social and affordable housing over 10 years, and plans to do some of the following: Build 100,000 new affordable housing units; Repair 300,000 housing units; and Extending housing subsidies that are set to expire. Combined with investments from provincial governments, the total spending could reach as high as $40 billion. The plan relies on the provinces and territories matching funds. Some of the key measures include: A certain number of units will be reserved for Canadians in vulnerable populations, such as people with developmental disabilities, seniors and survivors of family violence; Support for Indigenous people who do not live on reserves and a separate Indigenous housing strategy, which is to be released at a later date; Funding provided directly to low-income families and individuals; Funding to expand and extend the homelessness partnering strategy; Creating new legislation that will require future federal governments to maintain a federal housing strategy; and Creating an advocate for federal housing to help seek solutions to these systemic issues, such as advising the government and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation of possible solutions. The strategy includes a co-investment fund which will provide financial contributions and low interest loans to developers that meet certain criteria. The government will also be transferring federal land to housing providers on a number of conditions. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Real EstateDecember 12, 2017June 17, 2020
Postal Code Project – CRA Targets Wealthy Canadians Canada’s wealthiest individuals have been put under a microscope. The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has launched a project dubbed the “Postal Code Project” that is targeting taxpayers residing in affluent neighbourhoods across Canada. The Postal Code Project will be an in-depth analysis, using postal-codes in high-priced neighbourhoods, as an indicator of a taxpayer’s lifestyle. The goal of this Project is to conduct taxpayer reviews based on an indication that a taxpayer may be richer than is disclosed through his or her income tax filings; with the intention of discovering evidence of undeclared wealth. Details of this initiative were obtained by CBC News under an Access to Information request and reveal that the “residence focused approach to audit” is intended to further the Government’s stated priority of ensuring “that those who are wealthy pay the tax they owe”. As part of the Project the CRA will: Conduct a targeted audit of income tax filings address by address Conduct in-person assessments Conduct in-person interviews with taxpayers Look into lifestyle (such as boats, cars, houses) Send letters and notices Not only is this an innovative approach on the part of the CRA, this initiative is intended to indicate to the Canadian public that the CRA is committed to its fairness objective, especially after such leaks such as the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers, targeting those who shelter income in offshore accounts and entities. The briefing memo obtained by the CBC states that the Project is intended to serve “demonstrate to the public that the CRA is actively working towards its fairness objective, which speaks to our integrity as an organization”. According to the CRA, it has initiated a review of 1,150 households in 5 targeted neighbourhoods across Canada and have directly contacted 33 taxpayers. The Federal Government, the Minister of Finance and the CRA have come under recent scrutiny as a consequence of the controversial proposed tax changes targeting small businesses , the Minister of Finance’s conflict of interest woes, as well as the recent report from the Auditor General regarding CRA’s abysmal service standards and bad advice. It is a well-established principle of tax law that taxpayers are entitled to arrange their affairs to minimize tax. There are many valid and legal strategies which can be implemented by Canadian taxpayers through effective tax planning. If you have a tax or estate planning question, please contact tax lawyer to arrange a consultation. Devry Smith Frank LLP is a full service law firm with many experienced lawyers in every area of practice. If you are in need of a Tax lawyer, please take a look at our tax law practice page or contact. For more information, please contact us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, TaxDecember 5, 2017June 17, 2020
The Importance of Shareholder Agreements Any business that has two or more shareholders or equity investors should seriously consider having a shareholder agreement to protect not only the shareholders but also the business itself. Too often, the shareholders of a start-up business are reluctant to spend the time or money to prepare an agreement that addresses the major areas of business operations or potential areas of dispute that may arise in a jointly owned and managed business. While it is desirable to have an agreement that deals with most of the ongoing management issues in a business and the areas of potential disagreements, realistically the cost of preparing such agreement with successive meetings and drafts is not within the budget of a start-up business. However something is better than nothing, and a limited practical approach is to have what I like to refer to as a “Meanwhile Agreement.” This would take the form of two or three page listing of the most important areas of agreement between the parties without getting into the detailed “boilerplate” that usually finds its way into a 30-40 page agreement. There is always time and money available when a business evolves beyond the start-up phase and becomes profitable. There is no such thing as a standard off-the-shelf agreement that is a one size fits all document. The most effective way to ensure your shareholder agreement meets the needs of the parties is to require the parties to be involved in the process of establishing the terms of the shareholders’ agreement While a perfect Agreement is desirable, it is more realistic for the parties to feel comfortable that they can “live” with the terms of the Agreement, no matter how brief or detailed it may be. So what are we talking about? A Shareholder Agreement is essentially a private contract entered into voluntarily by all shareholders of a business, that contains the following kinds of provisions (the listing is not exhaustive), even in the simplest of businesses: the names of the shareholders the number and class of shares held by each shareholder the amount of investment by each shareholder what happens if the business requires additional capital allocation of responsibilities as between the different shareholders in the operation of the business what happens if a dispute arises between the shareholders; do the parties wish to create a mechanism for one shareholder to buy out the other How decisions relating to the business will be made; unanimity, or in the case of 3 or more shareholders, does a majority of votes rule What happens if a shareholder dies; will the shareholders, or the business take out insurance on each shareholder’s life to provide funds for a buy-out on death; what happens if a shareholder becomes incapacitated and is unable to work full time What happens if a shareholder wants to leave the business Are shareholders required to work full time in the business Is any shareholder permitted to start another business, or do engage in a competitive activity Without some agreement that deals with what happens if a dispute arises, any shareholder can apply to the court for an order winding up the business, not a desirable result. However, if the parties have addressed this issue in an agreement, even if it is a short one, the courts will give effect to the parties’ intentions. For more information or to arrange an appointment with Frank Shostack for any corporate services, please click on his profile, email him, or give him a call today. For any other needs, please call our office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Corporate LawDecember 1, 2017June 17, 2020
Cracking Down on the Issue of Parental Alienation In the UK, parents who are going through a separation or divorce could potentially be denied contact with their children if they try to turn them against their former spouse or partner. The practice of one parent turning the child(ren) against the other, especially during litigation, is nothing new and happens in almost every jurisdiction. Parental alienation can be commonly defined as “when one parent attempts to exclude the child(ren) from the other parents life.” The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) in the UK, which is similar to the Office of Children’s Lawyer in Ontario, has introduced a new process to give alienating parents the opportunity to correct their behaviour through concentrated therapy. Parents who do not respond will no longer be allowed to have their children live with them. Contact between the alienating parent and child may also be restricted or suspended for a number of months. In the most serious cases, the alienating parent may be permanently banned from contact with their child. CAFCASS notes that alienation occurs in a significant number of the 125,000 cases they hear in the UK each year. They estimate it is present in 11-15% of divorces and separations involving children, and that 1% of children experience it in North America. Sarah Parsons of CASCASS has said that this “new approach is ground-breaking,” and will assist parents and children, with the primary focus on allowing a child to avoid manipulation during the separation of a family. This new approach is unlike the process that occurs in the United States and Canada. In these countries, “parenting coordinators” are used to assist between parents and children who are deemed alienated. In Mexico and Brazil, alienation of a chid is considered a criminal act. The UK’s approach sets out guidelines for CAFCASS workers, known as “the high conflict pathway.” This itemizes the steps workers must take when suspected alienation is present. The pathway will also provide details and information on “when the child should be removed from the alienating parent and given to the “target parent””. These guidelines which will change how cases are dealt with in the Family Courts of England and Wales will also be considered by Judges, Experts, Doctors and Lawyers. In addition to the guidelines, there will be a 12-week programme that will focus on helping abusive parents to break their behaviour patterns by putting them into the child’s shoes. If the parent fails to progress through the programme, experts such as psychologists and mental health experts will be called in and contact to the child will be limited. To begin with, 50 high-conflict families will take part in a trial of this programme. If approved in the spring of 2018, it will then be standardised nationwide. The main goal of this initiative is to “preserve the relationship with both parents,” said Parsons. It is often the child that is the victim in these alienation cases. If successful, one hopes that an approach similar to that of CAFCASS can be trialed in Ontario before the end of 2018. For any family law matters, please contact our family law group. For all other inquiries, please contact our office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Family LawNovember 30, 2017July 7, 2023
Third Party Litigation Funding: Where is it in Canada? Third-party litigation financing presently plays a role in class actions and personal injury cases in Canada. After the event (ATE) insurance is increasingly common for plaintiffs to obtain in pursuing a personal injury case. Such insurance covers the expense that unsuccessful party has to pay towards the successful party’s legal fees. This is invaluable for access to justice for personal injury complainants who may be at risk of losing their homes if they are unsuccessful and ordered to pay the successful party’s legal fees. Such funding also seems appropriate in the class action setting where individually the plaintiffs would not see legal action as a viable means to remedying their claims. Used properly such third party financing and insurance lessens the consequences that an individual plaintiff may face if they decide to pursue their rights in the legal arena, thereby supporting access to justice. This type of funding does not affect the court’s ability to act in its rightful role in weeding out trivial or unmeritorious claims. Costs consequences are appropriate considerations in settlement negotiations, but they should not go so far as to prevent the individual claimant from considering litigating their claims. Where third party litigation financing finds merit in permitting individuals to participate in litigation when otherwise the financial risks of losing would prevent them, what is the rationale for such funding in commercial litigation? Does the policy rationale of promoting access to justice apply in the commercial realm? Outside funding can play a role in two ways for commercial litigation matters: it can fund the legal dispute itself, and it can insure against the litigation risk exposure. One interesting consideration is the relationship between third party litigation funding, litigation risk, and contingency fee arrangements. Contingency fee arrangements are common in personal injury, but much less so in commercial litigation. But, if third party funding develops in the commercial litigation field, will contingency fee arrangements begin to increase? While presently not widely used, contingency fees, unavailable in criminal, quasi-criminal and family law matters, are not prohibited in commercial disputes. The concerns regarding third party litigation financing can be mitigated through the use of competent and ethical lawyering. A commitment to solicitor-client privilege, appreciation for the merits of settlement, and discussing the risks of litigation beyond the financial consequences, such as the time demands, effect on reputation, and precedential effects of judgments. Further, the courts have developed guidelines for external funding arrangements in the class action context, where judicial approval is required, that can be used to shape arrangements that keep the focus of the litigation on dispute resolution and not profit. Moving forward, where third party funding arrangements can be agreed to which keep the financier a non-party to the dispute, there will likely be an increasing role for them in commercial litigation. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, LitigationNovember 29, 2017June 17, 2020
An Increase In Lots May Lead To An Increase In Opposition In the City of Toronto, consent applications are required for a variety of reasons, however, one of the most common ones is to divide the land into multiple lots. Depending on the municipality, consents are often dealt with by the Committee of Adjustment, however, that is not always the case. In the City of Toronto, for example, the Committee of Adjustment can make decisions regarding the creation of new lots, whereas decisions regarding other consent applications such as establishing easements or adding land to an abutting lot are directed to the Deputy-Secretary Treasurers of the Committee. In the residential context, severing lots often results in the opportunity to build multiple dwellings where previously there was only an opportunity to build one. In other words, severing land is often a precursor to intensification and additional development. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this has led to opposition to consent applications. Take for instance a recent application in Weston where a resident has applied to sever his lot which is 53 feet wide and is currently facing opposition from the Weston Historical Society & Conservation District. The Historical Society’s main concern appears to be ensuring that development is consistent with the character of the area. This may just be one of many reasons why a neighbour may take issue with your severance application. The resident’s application has not yet been heard by the Committee of Adjustment. Consent applications can be time-consuming and costly especially when faced with opposition and a potential appeal thereafter. If you are considering making a consent application or a minor variance application, Devry Smith Frank LLP’s Planning and Development Group will be happy to provide you with the guidance and support that you require throughout the process. “This article is intended to inform. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Planning and Development LawNovember 28, 2017June 17, 2020