Law Times

DIVERSITY BANDWAGON TRANSIT CONTRACTS Bay Street firms jumping on board Follow LAW TIMES on www.twitter.com/lawtimes $4.00 • Vol. 24, No. 19 P4 Time to close loopholes restricting bids FOCUS ON P6 L aw TIMEs Internet/E-commerce Law P8 CO V E R I N G O N TA R I O ' S L E G A L S C E N E • W W W. L AW T I M E S N E W S . CO M ntitled-4 1 June 3, 2013 12-03-20 10:44 A Ont. judge can sit elsewhere: Winkler Chief justice approves joint hearing in Alberta over AG's objections BY DAVID GRUBER For Law Times I n an unusual decision, the Superior Court has ruled that an Ontario judge may sit outside the province to hear a motion regarding a class action settlement agreement. The lawsuit, certified by the courts in Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec, relates to individuals infected with Hepatitis C after receiving tainted blood between January 1986 and July 1990. Although the Ontario attorney general objected to changing the location of the hearing, Ontario Chief Justice Warren Winkler, ruling in Parsons v. the Canadian Red Cross Society on May 24, held that the Ontario court's "inherent jurisdiction to fully control its own process" permits it to convene outside the province. In 1999, the governments of Canada, all 10 provinces, and the three territories agreed to be bound by the terms of a national settlement agreement. The settlement established a compensation fund of about $1.1 billion for a class of more than 13,000 members drawn from every province and territory, including approximately 5,200 Ontario residents. Counsel for the plaintiff is hoping that all three supervising judges from the superior courts of Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec will be able to sit together in the same physical location. Rulings from British Columbia and Quebec are still pending. All three jurisdictions will have to reach the same decision before all of the judges are able to sit together in one location. The three superior court judges had proposed to hear the motion together in Edmonton, where they were already scheduled to travel for a meeting of the Canadian Judicial Council. But the court adjourned the motion when the attorney general threatened to challenge the court's jurisdiction. Leading class action lawyer Harvey Strosberg, who The decision is a 'big step in the right direction,' says Harvey Strosberg. represented the plaintiff in Parsons, calls the decision "a big step in the right direction." "It's easier. It's less costly. Everybody will do it once," he says. In his ruling, Winkler rejected the attorney general's Photo: Robin Kuniski proposal to link the hearings using video-conferencing technology. "The technology isn't good enough," says Strosberg. "The nuances of the submissions will not be as good as in person." See Decision, page 4 Crown suing cops for $3.6M over 2007 arrest T The incident with police took place in Toronto's entertainment district in 2007. Photo: Glenn Kauth he Toronto Police Service is facing a $3.6-million lawsuit launched by a Crown attorney who alleges police improperly searched him because of his race in 2007. Roger Shallow's lawsuit seeks damages for malicious prosecution and negligent investigation. He's also seek declarations that police subjected him to an unlawful and unconstitutional strip search and that they unlawfully arrested him contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Examinations for discovery are concluding with a possible trial date set in the near future. None of the allegations have been proven in court. Information on the civil suit arose in a recent Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ruling against Toronto police alleging racial discrimination. In Shallow v. Toronto Police Services Board, he argues police improperly searched him because of his race. In 2007, police arrested Shallow in Toronto's club district and charged him with causing a disturbance and assault to resist arrest. The charges have since been dropped, but the incidents following his arrest left a bad taste in Shallow's mouth. The lawyer, who's black, claims police searched him in a manner that constitutes sexual assault. His lawyer said in court in 2009 that police officers made Shallow "manipulate his sexual organs." On May 16, the tribunal threw out a part of Shallow's application that names the Toronto Police Association as a respondent. That part of the application relates to allegations the association sought reprisal against Shallow for his human rights complaint. But in an interim decision, tribunal vice chairman David Muir said that issue is already the subject of civil proceedings. The tribunal also ruled it would defer judgment when it comes to the other respondents until his court cases are complete. PM #40762529 BY YAMRI TADDESE Law Times See Reprisals, page 4 Get more online lawtimesnews.com • canadianlawyermag.com Fresh Canadian legal news and analysis every day Canadian Lawyer | Law Times | 4Students | InHouse | Legal Feeds Visit Us Online 1-8-5X.indd 1 2/28/11 2:37:34 PM

• Cover