36092 Miller v. Convergys CMG Canada Limited Partnership, et al. (Employment law — Unjust dismissal — Contracts)
On appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia pronounced July 31, 2014. The applicant was dismissed without cause after seven years of employment with the respondent Convergys CMG Canada Limited Partnership. The respondent paid the applicant seven weeks’ pay in lieu of notice in accordance with an employment agreement signed five years previous. That notice period was in compliance with the Employment Standards Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 113. The applicant brought an action for wrongful dismissal seeking damages equivalent to 12 months’ income and benefits, plus punitive damages. He argued that the employment contract was unenforceable because it did not apply to his new position, the termination provision was ambiguous and the contract was unconscionable. The Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed the action, finding that the applicant’s entitlement to severance was governed by his employment agreement rather than the common law. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
36067 Ormiston, et al. v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, et al. (Torts – Duty of care – Motor vehicles)
On appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia pronounced July 8, 2014. In November, 2009, the applicant was riding his bicycle to school when he had an accident after descending a steep hill along Lindholm Road near Victoria, B.C., sustaining serious injuries. He alleged that he was forced into a concrete abutment by the actions of a vehicle that veered suddenly into his path just as he was passing it on the right, causing him to be ejected from his bicycle over an abutment and down a ravine onto rocks below. Neither the driver nor the vehicle was ever identified and the action was commenced against the British Columbia Insurance Corporation and “John Doe”. By court order, the issue of liability was severed from the issue of damages. The Supreme Court of British Columbia found the respondents to be 70 percent liable for the applicant’s injuries. The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal.
36181 Tupper v. A.G. Nova Scotia, et al. (Appeals — Costs)
On appeal from the judgment of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal pronounced August 14, 2014. In 1985, the applicant was ordered to pay non-pecuniary general damages to a plaintiff after a trial involving a motor vehicle accident. He has since been involved in numerous lawsuits based on allegations that all concerned were involved in an insurance fraud conspiracy against him. In the context of one of the applicant’s lawsuits, security for costs was requested by the respondents. The Court of Appeal granted the respondents’ motion for security for costs and subsequently granted the respondents’ motion for dismissal and dismissed the applicant’s application for review.
36102 Insurance Corporation of British Columbia v. Stainton Ventures Ltd. (Intellectual property – Trade-marks – Official marks)
On appeal from the judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal pronounced July 22, 2014. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (“ICBC”) is a public authority that provides universal compulsory car insurance in British Columbia. It uses a family of official marks, including “ICBC” in association with its business, in accordance with the Trade-marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13 (the “Act”). The respondent operates a commercial website called “ICBCadvice.com”, self-described as a completely free online resource outlining all the issues and complications that might be encountered by the public when dealing with ICBC. It also owns the Internet domain names <icbcadvice.com> and <icbcadvice.ca>, both of which direct the public to the ICBCadvice.com website. The respondent initially operated its website under a different domain name but changed it in 2006 after discussions with ICBC. In May of 2009, ICBC demanded that the respondent cease using the new domain names, and transfer ownership of them to ICBC. The respondent did not comply with ICBC's demand, except that it changed the name of its claim guide advertized on its website from “ICBC Claim Guide” to “ICBCadvice Claim Guide”. ICBC applied for declarations that, inter alia, the respondent had adopted and used prohibited marks contrary to ss. 9 and 11 of the Act and had passed-off its business, wares and services as and for ICBC's business, wares and services. ICBC further applied for an order that the respondent transfer and assign to it ownership of the domain names, and sought injunctive relief. The Supreme Court of British Columbia held that ICBC was entitled to order restraining the respondent from distributing electronic or hard copies of its claim guide, but dismissed ICBC’s claims pursuant to the Trade-mark Act, the tort of passing off and the Competition Act. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
36141 Quinn v. The Queen (Criminal law – Evidence – Identification)
On appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario pronounced August 28, 2014. A witness described an intruder to the police in very general terms and did not pick him out of a photo lineup. At a later date, the police saw the applicant commit a break and enter at a different location. Four police cars then proceeded to “box-in” the applicant’s car. Three police cars, lights activated, surrounded him in a high risk take down. One police car was at the driver’s side, one was at the passenger’s side and one was in front of him. The applicant then reversed. He ran into the fourth police car that was just arriving to block him in from behind. The applicant was convicted of break and enter with intent, dangerous driving, failing to stop a vehicle while being pursued by the police, and mischief. The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal.
36062 Hilowle v. The Queen (Criminal law – Sentencing – Collateral consequences of sentence)
On appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan pronounced October 14, 2014. The applicant was convicted of aggravated assault after he struck the victim with a baseball bat. The applicant was sentenced to two and one-half years in prison. On appeal, the applicant’s request for a court appointed counsel was dismissed. The appeal of his conviction and sentence was dismissed. The applicant’s motion for re-hearing of the appeal was dismissed.