Law Times

PAGE 4 NEWS May 14, 2012 • Law TiMes Lynn Gilbank case Court rejects favouritism for murdered lawyer's daughter BY KENDYL SEBESTA Law Times T DEFINITIVE GUIDANCE ON TAX COURT PROCEDURE TAX COURT PRACTICE NOW ON CD-ROM For more than two decades, Tax Court Practice has been your definitive resource when preparing for court. Now this authoritative guidance is available to you in the courtroom on the NEW CD-ROM for Tax Court Practice and bonus Portable Tax Court Practice, Act and Rules. This new folio-based CD-ROM for Tax Court Practice is a completely searchable version of all the contents in this comprehensive two- volume work. It allows you to tailor your search precisely with: • Hypertext linking • Folio functionality • Legislation and cases linking to our premier online tax service, Taxnet Pro® The new CD-ROM will be available with the next release of case updates, May 2012. ROBERT McMECHAN, B.A., LL.B., LL.M., AND GORDON BOURGARD, LL.B., LL.M. won't get more favourable treatment from the courts than the man once accused of murdering them, the Ontario Superior Court has ruled. Setting aside a 2011 order by Master he child of a criminal defence lawyer and a computer expert who were shot to death in their home in Ancaster, Ont., in 1998 Donald Short, Justice Ted Matlow de- termined in Gravelle v. CTV Television Inc. that the desire of Kris- ten Gilbank Savoie to move a defamation ac- tion against her and sev- eral other defendants to Hamilton, Ont., from Toronto shouldn't have received a favourable response from the court over a competing action brought by the plain- tiff simply because her mother had been an of- fi cer of the court. Matlow suggested lawyer, and her husband Fred were shot execution-style in their Ancaster home in the early hours of Nov. 16, 1998. Police charged Gravelle with their murder in 2005. Th e charge against him was subse- quently withdrawn in 2006. Gravelle has since launched a lawsuit Lynn Gilbank, a criminal defence seeking relief and damages from Gilbank Savoie and nine other defendants for statements about his alleged involvement in the murders. According to Matlow' reasons, Gravelle has denied any involve- ment in or knowledge of the murders. Following the charge s against Gravelle, CTV had run a special about the case on the docu- mentary program W5. Gilbank Savoie and several others spoke about the murders and Gravelle' volvement. Th e ruling is wel- s alleged in- any favouritism by the court toward Gilbank Savoie would deny An- dre Gravelle, the man once accused of murdering her parents Lynn and Fred Gilbank, of his right to a fair hearing and would have a chilling ef- fect on the court' row [Short] felt, it was wrong for him to give eff ect to his unfounded belief that the court had some special duty to the child of the murdered barrister, 'The courts cannot favour one client over another and have a duty to ensure everyone is treated fairly in court,' says Adam Dodek. an important role in protecting the funda- mental principles of On- tario' s decision plays of law. "However, no matter how much sor- s fundamental principles in his reasons. "Th e message given, despite the mas- ter's attempt to soſt en it with the language " wrote Matlow contained in paragraph 49, was that law- yers and their children are entitled to be treated by the court more favourably than others. However, nothing could be fur- ther from the truth." Gilbank Savoie had sought to move a defamation action brought by Gravelle against her and several CTV reporters. She argued the action should take place in the Hamilton area, where her parents were murdered, rather than Toronto. Short agreed and granted her motion in ORDER # 9574612 $478 2 volume looseleaf supplemented book + CD-ROM Anticipated upkeep cost – $152 per supplement 3-4 supplements per year Supplements invoiced separately 0-459-57461-2 January 2011. He found that although there were concerns with moving the action to Hamilton, a properly instructed jury could deliver a true verdict. Short also noted the court should heavily "consider the circum- stances and in particular, the desires of the daughter of one of its offi cers." absolutely correct," says Adam Dodek, an Ottawa lawyer and legal ethics professor at the University of Ottawa. "Th e courts cannot favour one client over another and have a duty to ensure everyone is treated fairly in court." But Allan Hutchinson, a legal theorist "Justice Matlow was s courts. at Osgoode Hall Law School, says that although Matlow' there should still be consideration for crime victims who may have been target- ed for their profession. "Taken starkly, Justice Matlow was s decision was correct, come news to some legal experts who say Matlow' right," says Hutchinson. "But I do think the victim could have gotten a reading that was slightly more benevolent. Th ere are rules in place which try to protect members of the court and they may re- quire greater consideration in these cases." Still, Dodek says the court also has the duty to ensure consideration of a victim's profession doesn't outweigh the rights of the accused. "It shouldn't matter who the victim of a crime is," he says. "All cases before the tion matter have been proven in court. Th e court has yet to set a date for the trial. LT None of the allegations in the defama- " court should be treated fairly and impar- tially. On the same hand, a person who is accused of a crime shouldn't be treated unfairly either. AVAILABLE RISK-FREE FOR 30 DAYS Order online at www.carswell.com Call Toll-Free: 1-800-387-5164 In Toronto: 416-609-3800 Shipping and handling are extra. Prices subject to change without notice and subject to applicable taxes. www.lawtimesnews.com

• Cover