Labour Notes® Newsletter Features Article by Nadine Zacks on the Supreme Court Decision Regarding Canada Labour Code Safety Inspections

The January 28, 2020 issue of Labour Notes® features an article authored by Hicks Morley lawyer Nadine Zacks. This article explores one of the complications within the Canada Labor Code and the recent resolution of the Supreme Court that gives a clear parameter to employers as far they are legally responsible in relation to work locations and gives an overturn to the decision of the Federal Court that imposed unmanageable and impractical obligations.

We Welcome a New Associate to the Firm

Hicks Morley is pleased to announce that Rebecca Liu has joined the firm as an associate in our Toronto office. Rebecca represents private and public sector employers in grievance arbitrations, human rights complaints, wrongful dismissal claims, employment standards complaints and employment contract disputes.

Management Rights, Sick Leave under HOODIP and More

In our first HR Healthcheck of 2020, we discuss two cases you need to know about. The first deals with whether a scheduled medical procedure under conscious sedation falls within the “sick leave” provisions of HOODIP. The second case considers management rights under the central CUPE collective agreement and a Hospital’s right to transfer employees.

Rebecca Liu

As an experienced litigator, Rebecca represents employers in grievance arbitrations, interest arbitrations, labour board proceedings and human rights complaints.

New False Light Privacy Tort Recognized by Ontario Court

The case of Yenovkian v. Gulian is a significant case that, for the first time in Canada, has recognized a new privacy tort – “publicity placing a person in a false light.” The decision was decided by Justice Kristjanson of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and released in late 2019. The case arose out…

New Standard of Review for Treatment Capacity Appeals – The Vavilov Effect

In December 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada established a new framework that is designed to guide courts on applying the standard of review in judicial review applications. The Court’s long-awaited “trilogy” of cases in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov and the two companion appeals heard together in Bell Canada v Canada (Attorney General) (collectively, Vavilov) represents an express departure and evolution from the framework that the Court set out in previous cases. Consequently, these decisions will affect the standard upon which Consent and Capacity Board (CCB) appeals will be heard by the courts.