Driver Acquitted of Impaired Driving Charges after News Crew Filmed Him at RIDE Checkpoint Due to a Global News crew filming a man who was pulled over, Kunal Gautam, at a RIDE check, a judge has acquitted his impaired driving charges. The judge, Ontario Court Justice David Rose said in his statement that Gautam has been acquitted as a result of: No evidence to suggest that York Regional Police placed any restrictions on the Global News TV crew Kunal Gautam’s rights to counsel were violated and to be free from unreasonable search and seizure were infringed upon (Charter rights were violated) Publicizing of a fairly routine police alcohol driving interdiction program Gautam blew two breath samples which came back at 152 and 146mg of alcohol in 100ml of blood. While he was on the phone with a lawyer, a camera operator even placed his camera at the window pointing directly at Gautam while he was in the phone booth, making him feel uncomfortable when asking the lawyer questions, which resulted in the right to counsel violation. With the overwhelming effort of the Global News crew to gain access to the RIDE process and even interview Gautam during the segment, the judge had no choice but to exclude the blood alcohol content from evidence due to the violations, ultimately acquitting all of the charges against Gautam. If you are in need of legal advice or representation, please contact the lawyers at Devry Smith Frank LLP. You may visit our website or contact us directly at 416-449-1400 for more information. By: Nicolas Di Nardo “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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, Criminal LawAugust 31, 2017June 18, 2020
Mid-rise Housing, The Next Best Thing for Toronto Real Estate? With detached homes in Toronto reaching unattainable prices and an abundance of high rise condos taking over the city skyline, most of which are either purchased and sitting empty or demanding rent that is extremely high, could midrise development within some of Toronto’s neighbourhoods be the answer to the homeownership struggle many Torontonians are facing? Toronto planners think so, as they claim it would not overwhelm neighbourhoods and at the same time, will provide housing for thousands. Midrise buildings are typically four to eleven storeys, that many NIMBYs are opposed to having populated their neighbourhoods. To find out more on NIMBYs and their influence on Toronto’s real estate, check out two of our previous blogs: Affluent Boomers are Taking Pressure from ‘YIMBY’ Groups in the GTA Reasons Why A Starter Home is No Longer an Option Midrise development is, unfortunately, becoming tougher for developers to propose and carry out, as these so-called NIMBYs, or locals to the neighbourhoods in which the midrise development is being proposed, fight these developers to try to halt their project. In the most recent fight against a midrise development, these angry residents feature some of Toronto’s elite, such as Margaret Atwood, Galen Weston Jr., Scott Mcfarland, and his wife, Cleophee Eaton (yes, the department store). Some of their claims to the government include simply, ruining the Annex and destroying their quality of life. An excerpt from Weston’s email to Toronto city councillor Joe Cressy reads: “The development, designed as is, will change the neighbourhood in such a negative capacity and will devalue all of the assets we currently love about living here; it will no longer be the ideal place for our young family to grow up. This building is an invasion of our privacy, our community, and an environmental assault on our neighbourhood.” Now, they are probably concerned mostly about their privacy. With success comes money, with money comes entitlement (for the most part). As columnist Emma Teitel puts it, “they’ve chosen to make a stink about the possibility that someday down the line, someone standing on a balcony will be able to peer into their yards and see them barbecuing corn.” They are failing to see the benefit of such a development. Their blurred reasoning and understanding of this development proposal, maybe due to the fact that they are very successful and don’t want peering eyes into their backyards as Teitel said, or it could merely be because they don’t know what it is like to not own a home in the fourth-largest city on the continent, thus they cannot fathom what it is like to be an average Torontonian in this day and age, and how much these midrise developments really do benefit not only the city but the area it is situated in as well. As much as people don’t like change (take the recent renaming of the ACC to Scotiabank Arena as a prime example) you are forced to either adopt, adapt, or leave. As many like to put it, you better shape up or ship out. In the past, NIMBYs have fought against an Ossington midrise, that they took all the way to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). In 2015, the OMB approved the project but made minor modifications to the plans. It was a six-storey, 85 suite building. Now that it is up, it is clear that it is the best thing to happen to Ossington in the last century, and many of the so-called NIMBYs are starting to realize that. With the outrage for the proposed Davenport midrise, will it surprise anyone if the fight goes all the way to the OMB? Probably not. Based on Galen Weston’s email to Cressy, it sounds like he will take it upon himself to make sure the OMB does review it. Yes, the Annex is home to a number of notable figures, but it is also a central neighbourhood with a subway, shops, and is walking distance to a major university in the city. The fight to limit the accommodation of people who inhabit Toronto, especially a region within Toronto that is already a bustling metropolis, therefore, seems foolish of the elite to be against. You’d think with all of their smarts and success, along with the results of past challenges presented to the OMB, our influential Annexers would think twice and let it be. If you are in need of a planning and development lawyer or real estate lawyer, please contact our Planning and Development lawyers or Real Estate lawyers today. If you have any other questions, you can contact our office directly at (416) 449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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 Law, Real EstateAugust 31, 2017June 18, 2020
How is the Money from the Sale of a House Divided in a Divorce? Family lawyer John Schuman was recently asked this question: I bought my home in 1995 and it became the matrimonial home when i married my husband in 2009. I’m filing for divorce now and selling the house. Is the money from the sale of the house split 50/50 or will I receive a bit more being the original owner of the house? My husband is on the mortgage as well. Answer by John Schuman: When married couples separate in Ontario, the home (or homes – there can be more than one) that they live in on the day they separate gets special treatment in property “equalization” process. (Non-married or common-law couples may not divide property or may do it differently.) Those special rules may make it seem that matrimonial homes are divided “50/50”, but that is not actually how it works. The property division provisions of Ontario’s Family Law Act do not give married people any right of ownership over their spouses’ property or other assets. If title to the matrimonial home is in your name, it stays in your name, subject to some claims your spouse can make if he or she makes significant contributions to that property. Just being married does not mean spouses both own their home (or homes). Watch this video for more details on how Ontario Law divides the value of property, not the property itself, on separation. There are a number of special rights that attach to matrimonial homes (or homes). One is that neither spouse can kick the other out of matrimonial home, or secure debt against a matrimonial home, without the other spouse’s consent or a court order. The reason people think they share the equity in matrimonial homes 50/50 is that, absent a marriage contract, the entire equity in a matrimonial home is always included in the value of assets that married spouses share. With almost every other type of asset, spouses only share in the growth in the value during the marriage. However, section 5(2) of the Family Law Act does not allow a spouse to get any credit for bringing a property into the marriage if that property was a matrimonial home on the date of separation. So, without a marriage contract, spouses share whatever value is in their matrimonial homes. Spouses do not necessarily have to give their spouses “half the house” on separation. That spouse is entitled to stay in the house, and to have the equity included in property division, but, if a home is not jointly owned, there is not right to “half of it.” It is just included in the assets to be divided. So, if the spouse who does not own the matrimonial home has lots of savings or a pension to include in his or her assets to be divided, that may offset the value in the matrimonial home. If the spouse who owns the matrimonial home had a lot of assets (other than the matrimonial home) on the date of marriage, his or her increases in net worth may be less than the other spouse, which would mean the home would not be divided. The same may be also be try if the spouse who owns the matrimonial home has a lot of debt on separation may not have the increase in net worth that is necessary to owe the other spouse anything. But, in short term marriages, there is a real danger that a spouse can walk away being entitled to half the other spouse’s home. If the marriage was short, the couple may still live in the same house that one spouse brought into the marriage. In that case, the spouse with the house has to share half the value of the house because there were almost no changes in each spouse’s financial situation and so nothing to offset the value in the matrimonial home when the spouses “Net Family Properties” are “equalized.” Watch this video or listen to this podcast, for more on the dangers posed by the law of matrimonial homes. Note that that the special rights for matrimonial homes only apply between two spouses. Those rights regarding matrimonial homes do not apply to third parties, such as in-laws, landlords, business partners, or friends. A spouse has no right under Family Law to stay in a home owned by his or her in-laws or another landlord. You certainly do not become entitled to “half” of a matrimonial home that neither spouse owns. People who think they should have rights with respect to a property that is not owned by them or their spouse should speak to a lawyer to see if any other type of law might help. Before or after a marriage, spouses should never assume that the matrimonial home will just be divided 50/50 until they have each spoken to a lawyer to figure out how Ontario Family Law will work in their family’s situation. This is an area where making a mistake can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. There may be things a lawyer can do to make things fairer – especially before a separation. But even after separation, there may be possibility of making the tricky legal arguments to adjust how property is divided either pursuant to section5(6) of the Family Law Act or the Principles of Equity. Obviously, there can be a lot of money involved in any marriage or relationship and that means there can be a lot at stake financially. Get the help of a lawyer immediately to avoid financial hardship. You can get a lot more information about Ontario Family Law issues, including property division, support, and most other common family law issues by downloading this $9.99 e-book for Kindle, Kobo, or iPad/iPhone/Mac or ordering the paperback version. But, to keep out of trouble, it is always best to speak with a top family law lawyer. By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Family LawAugust 30, 2017July 5, 2023
Significant Changes Coming to Ontario’s Labour and Employment Laws Ontario is one step closer to approving the minimum wage increase of $15 an hour, however that is not the only change that is on Ontario’s horizon. A legislative committee studying the bill has concluded its work, advancing the bill to the fall session of the legislature, which begins September 11. Bill 148, known as the Fair Workplaces, Better Jobs Act, includes much more than a dramatic increase in the minimum wage. The bill makes large amendments to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”), Ontario’s minimum standards legislation, and the Labour Relations Act (“LRA”), which governs unionization. Many of these changes are favourable to employees, in an effort to alleviate the impacts of precarious work. Based on a worker’s classification as either an “employee,” “dependent contractor,” and “independent contractor,” a worker gets different rights under Ontario’s minimum standards legislation. The Ontario government seeks to introduce an automatic presumption that a worker is an “employee” (entitling them to the most rights) and that it would be illegal for an employer to misclassify its workers (to evade minimum standards legislation). The government also proposed to regulate scheduling inside a workplace. If the bill is passed, an employee who has been working for more than three months in a workplace can request a change in their schedule or work location without fearing dismissal. The well-known “3 hour rule” (i.e that a worker be paid for at least 3 hours for a shift) has been expanded to all workplaces and will even be triggered if an employer cancels a shift 48 hours before the employee was to commence working. An employee will also gain the right to refuse shifts without fear of termination if the request is made less than 96 hours before the proposed shift was to begin. Vacation pay entitlements will also be increased: an employee working less than 5 years for the same employer will continue to receive 2 weeks of paid vacation but an employee working more than 5 years for the same employer will receive 3 weeks of statutory vacation. The government also focused on making stronger provisions for equal pay for equal work. If passed, it would become illegal to pay part-time workers less than full-time workers and temporary help workers less than their directly-hired counterparts (absent other objective factors). Moreover, if a worker believes that they were being paid less on the basis of sex or employment status, they would gain the right to request a written review where the employer must either a) raise their wage or b) provide written reasons about why they disagree. Temporary help agencies would also face further regulation on their practices, including owing its employees one week “termination of assignment” pay (similar to “severance pay”) if the employee was terminated from a contract that was supposed to last 3 months or more. These employees would not get “termination of assignment” pay if they were placed in a new contract within a week. The government also hopes to introduce two (2) days of paid leave of absences and eight (8) days of unpaid personal emergency leave. This leave would cover personal illnesses, injuries and medical emergencies (for both the employee and his or her close relatives) and situations of sexual or domestic violence. Employers can request reasonable evidence of the employee’s entitlement to take the leave. It will also become less burdensome to file a complaint under the ESA. Previously, employees who felt their minimum standards were being breached needed to first notify their employer before making a complaint. This requirement would be removed under the new bill. The Director (the person who enforces the ESA) will also be allowed to collect security for any amounts owing under the ESA. Notices of contravention and Recognitions would be able to be widely publicized, despite privacy laws. Alcohol servers and others would be happy to know that the government has created a more specific definition of what constitutes a “tip” in order to prevent employers from stealing tips meant for their employees. The field of labour and employment law is becoming very complex for both employees and employers. It is important to seek out an experience labour and employment lawyer who knows not only the current law, but changes on the horizon. Devry Smith Frank LLP is a full service law firm that has a very experienced group of lawyers within our employee and labour law groups. If you are in need of representation, please contact one of our lawyers today or call us directly at 416-449-1400. By: Michelle Cook, Summer Law Student “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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, Employment Law, Labour LawAugust 30, 2017June 18, 2020
Am I on the Hook to Pay Child Support Retroactively? One of DSF’s Toronto Family Lawyers was recently asked the following question: Can child support payments be retroactive? My former spouse never claimed child support and on top of that refused to take support payments from me for years. Recently, my former spouse has gotten into some financial trouble and filed an application for me to start paying child support. Will I have to pay child support retroactively from the date of our separation or will it start from the date of the application? Their Answer: The short answer is it depends. Family Courts can order retroactive child support in certain circumstances. In 2006, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on the issue of retroactive child support in D.B.S. v S.R.G. The Court looked at when retroactive child support can be ordered and in what circumstances. The Court provided a list of factors to take into account when child support can or should be ordered. Child support orders are made in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines. There is a table amount that is set out for various income levels and the amount of support is based on the income of the payor spouse and the number of children. The Guideline was introduced as a way to make child support as simple, objective and predictable as possible. In deciding whether or not retroactive child support should be ordered, the Court looked at four factors: Is there a reasonable excuse for the delay in making the application; What is the conduct of the payor parent? Whether or not the conduct was blameworthy; What are the circumstances of the child; and Will there be hardship caused on the payor parent by the retroactive payment? In deciding the quantum of the award, there are four possible dates that the retroactive child support can be awarded from. Retroactive payments can be awarded from the date: The application is made; Of formal notice to the payor parent; Of effective notice to the payor parent; or When the amount should have been increased. The Court imposed a three-year limit as a rough guideline for how far back child support can be ordered. To answer the question above, it is likely that a Court would order retroactive child support to the date of ‘effective notice’. Effective notice, as the general rule, is the date that there is an indication by the recipient parent that child support should be paid. It is not the date that legal action is taken, such as filing the application, but is the date that the topic has been brought up with the payor parent. Because there has been no blameworthy conduct on the part of the payor parent, there would be no reason to move away from the date of effective notice. In this circumstance, the parent would have to pay retroactive support payments from the date the former spouse brought up that he or she now needed the support payments. The requirement to pay child support is a free-standing obligation that can fluctuate over time with the income and circumstances of the spouses. You can read more on the topic here, on John Schuman’s blog. John Schuman is a Certified Specialist in family law and is the partner managing the Family Law Group at Devry Smith Frank LLP. If you have any questions about child support or family law generally, please visit our website and contact one of our Toronto family lawyers today. By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Family LawAugust 29, 2017June 18, 2020
Barrie’s Real Estate Market Struggle Many home-buyers got caught in the spring real estate downturn. As a result, many homes have had delayed closings and people have even backed out of real estate deals, not caring that they will lose their deposit. Most of this stems from the buyers deciding to purchase a home in the heat of the market, placing a competitive down payment, only to realize that as their closing date approaches the value of the home has decreased significantly, sometimes more than the deposit that was made. Others have not been able to close due to the mortgage amount not meeting the purchase obligation of the home. Peggy Hill, a real estate agent for Keller Williams said, “closings have been stalling [everywhere] since the end of June.” In Barrie, even though prices are not at the level that Toronto has seen, the drop has been precipitous. Barrie’s average price for a home was $471,822 in July, while March was $570,199. That’s a $100,000 difference in a matter of months. Back in July of 2016, 208 of 260 homes listed were sold, but this July saw 201 sales with 683 active listings. The real estate frenzy in Barrie mimicked that of Toronto, with home selling in a week well over list price. Barrie homebuyers were even experiencing the same competitive market when looking to buy, resulting in bidding wars, and competing with people who live outside of the region, like buyers from Toronto who wanted to get out of the city. Unfortunately, the tough lesson here is that “a heated market does not automatically translate into a true market value. When you take away the heat, it settles down into something that is perhaps more reflective of what true market value is,” says Appraisal Institute of Canada’s CEO Keith Lancastle. Buyers tempted to walk have to realize that they may face a lawsuit. For example, if a house is bought for $500,000 and you decide to forfeit the deposit, the seller goes and gets $450,000 from another buyer, you can be sued for the difference. Realtors may also sue, because they are not getting a commission and have to incur additional legal and carrying costs. Some advice, be careful in the current real estate market. If you can wait it out, it may be a better idea than investing now, you don’t want to end up backing out of a deal only to realize you owe money to the seller and/or are being sued by a realtor. If you are in need of a Barrie Real Estate or Commercial Real Estate lawyer, please visit our website and contact one of our Barrie Real Estate lawyers today. If you are in need of any other services or have any questions, you may also contact our Barrie office directly at 705-812-2100. By: Nicolas Di Nardo “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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 EstateAugust 28, 2017June 18, 2020
Gender Neutral Passports will be Available for Canadians Gender-neutral passports will soon be making their way into the hands of Canadians. Canadians who do not identify as male or female will soon be able to mark an “X” on their passports instead of “M” or “F”. Allowing this change addresses the current state of society and the changes in gender identity and expression, which falls in line with the government’s most recent efforts, and will make it easier for individuals to reflect their identity through government issued documents. Gender neutral passports have been something long awaited by the Canadian transgender community. Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen said, “all Canadians should feel safe to be themselves, live according to their gender identity and express their gender as they choose.” Before this was introduced, Parliament passed Bill C-16 earlier this summer, which amended the Canadian Human Rights Act to add gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds for discrimination. For more on Bill C-16, please read our previous blog post by lawyer Marc Kemerer. For more information on Bill C-16 or related issues, please contact Marc Kemerer today. More information on the government’s effort to better accommodate gender identity and expression through the modification of government issued documents through Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada will be announced on August 31. At Devry Smith Frank LLP we have experienced lawyers in all areas of law. For any questions on immigration matters, please contact DSF’s immigration group. For any other questions or information, please call our office directly at 416-449-1400. By: Nicolas Di Nardo “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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, Human Rights LawAugust 25, 2017June 18, 2020
Highly-skilled foreign workers and tech industry look to Canada There has been an on-going debate as to whether expedited visa programs for highly-skilled foreign trained workers are salutary from a domestic labour point of view. One perspective decries them as facilitating domestic job theft, while an alternative perspective recognizes that such visas are necessary to fill glaring gaps in the domestic labour pool. The United States has affirmed the former position; whereas recent changes to Canada’s immigration policy support the latter. The American visa system for highly-skilled foreign workers, the H-1B visa, has a cap of 85,000. This cap is intended to prevent foreign workers from usurping well-paid jobs from Americans, in a protectionist, America-first philosophy. This perspective, coupled with pervasive uncertainty in future immigration trends in the Trump presidency, has caused certain industries dependent on highly skilled labour to look for opportunities elsewhere. Canada’s official position on highly skilled foreign workers is much more inviting. There is no cap on the number of visas, there is certainty in work permits, and, as of June 2017, Canada has adopted the Global Skills Strategy, to facilitate and expedite the entry of such individuals. This new programme has made bringing in foreign talent more accessible and timely, and it reduces costs for employers. Employers will benefit from the transparency of the programme, in knowing what the precise requirements for entry are, as well as being able to adapt their plans given the speedy two week decision-making period. These diverging perspectives are changing the international flow of labour with respect to the tech industry. Not only is the tech industry reliant on a high level of skill and specific talent, it is also especially reliant on foreign workers, particularly those from India. Large multinational corporations are seeking opportunities to have subsidiaries or satellite offices in Canada in order to benefit from a more favourable immigration policy. As well, tech start-ups are increasingly looking to Canada as a place to form their businesses. These Canadian offices are geographically close to their American counterparts, often in the same time zone, to facilitate easy cross-border collaboration. Additionally, the employees may feel more secure, given the accessibility of longer stays and permanent residency, and, potentially, citizenship for themselves and their families. This favorable immigration environment is conducive to the ever expanding tech industry. The majority of tech workers in the tech hubs, such as Silicon Valley, are foreign workers. And these innovative workers drive production and grow the economy. Investing and supporting the tech sector through inviting foreign workers actually creates domestic jobs rather than eliminating them, as these entrepreneurial tech positions create growth and expand companies and their need for more employees. The new Global Skills Strategy recognizes that Canada presently lacks the domestic talent to satisfy the demand in these industries. The new program is paving the way for Canadian cities to become more competitive in the lucrative tech through including highly skilled foreign workers. If you are an employer looking to hire a highly-skilled foreign worker, or you are a highly-skilled worker looking to come to Canada, or for any other immigration-related matters, please contact our Immigration lawyers today. For any other inquiries, browse our website, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. By: Samantha Hamilton, Student-at-Law “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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, ImmigrationAugust 25, 2017June 19, 2020
When Discrimination is Not Prohibited: Housing Caleb Pheluong, a Vancouver resident, was served eviction papers once his landlord discovered that he intended to have his boyfriend stay over one night. The landlord expressed to him via text message that homosexuality was against her “Christian beliefs” and she could no longer have him living in her house. Is this discrimination? Sexual orientation is a protected ground under Human Rights Codes, and the landlord, in writing, expressed that his sexual orientation was the reason for his eviction. According to the B.C. Human Rights Code, no, it is not unlawful discrimination. And the answer would be no different in Ontario. Both Codes prohibit discrimination in accommodation and list sexual orientation as one of the grounds that are protected. This means, for example, that sexual orientation cannot be a reason for refusing to rent to a tenant. However, the Codes provide an exception for landlords who provide accommodation in dwellings that they also occupy. In Ontario, section 21(1) expresses that landlords who share either a kitchen and/or a bathroom with their tenant are exempt from the prohibitions on discrimination. Sharing a bathroom or kitchen with your landlord or their family takes you out from under the protection of the Human Rights Code and leaves you vulnerable to discrimination without legal recourse. Caleb fell victim to this loophole; he has no right under the law to remain a tenant in his present house or be compensated for the discrimination he faced. If, however, you fall outside this exception, you do have protection under the Code from such discrimination in accommodation. A recent Ontario Human Rights Tribunal decision awarded a couple $12,000 for their landlord’s discriminatory attitude and actions when he failed to accommodate their religious practices while he was re-letting the apartment they were vacating. The landlord’s refusal to agree to their requests, such as removing outdoor shoes before entering their prayer space, was held to be discrimination under the Code. Two very different legal outcomes from what appears to be acts of discriminatory conduct from a landlord towards a tenant. What these tenant situations illuminate is the difference in treatment of tenants who rent shared spaces with those who rent self-contained, private spaces. For information or assistance in regards to protections and legal recourse for human rights claims please contact one of our Human Rights Litigation Lawyers. By: Samantha Hamilton, Student-at-Law “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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, Human Rights LawAugust 24, 2017June 19, 2020
Parking Ticket Disputes are About to Change Frustrated about getting a parking ticket and having to fight it, only to realize your court date is set for a time too far in the future? Well, the parking dispute process is about to change on Monday. Back in 2015 the city cancelled 880,000 tickets due to limited court capacity that created delays in hearing challenges. They hope to stop that from happening again – by taking the disputes out of the courts. So, what will the new system bring? The city will handle disputes, with a better and faster review process. You will now be given the option of disputing your tickets online or in person with a screening officer. If you choose to review it in person, you will be able to schedule an appointment or drop in. The reviews will allow you to: Explain why they should cancel or vary the violation Explain why you may need additional time to pay the fine Officers then review it and make the decision to either: affirm, vary or cancel the fee, or give people additional time to pay. They base their decision on grounds set out in the administrative penalty bylaw. Now that you do not need to go to court, you may be wondering what you can do to appeal and if you can be represented by a lawyer or paralegal. Well, you can still do so. Individuals can dispute and request a review of their violation. Once the screening officers review it, if you are not satisfied you can request a second review with an independent council-appointed hearing officer of the administrative penalty tribunal. However, the hearing officer’s decision is FINAL. At this point, you can appoint a lawyer, paralegal, or someone authorized under the Law Society Act to act on your behalf. This process will allow the provincial court system to deal with more serious matters, as they free up the courts and also allow people fighting parking tickets the opportunity to have faster resolutions. One thing that people may not be happy with (those who try to avoid getting the ticket), is that even if you drive away while the officer is writing the ticket, you will still receive it via the mail. In addition to speeding up the process for people who would like to dispute tickets, the change will also save the city money in terms of what is spent on parking enforcement, which was approximately $65.7 million. The new system is expected to reduce it to $62.9 million. At Devry Smith Frank LLP we have experienced lawyers in all areas of law. If you are looking for a lawyer or have general questions, please feel free to contact one of our lawyers today, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. By: Nicolas Di Nardo “This article is intended to inform and entertain. 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 SiddiquiBlogAugust 24, 2017June 19, 2020