Someone asked a question – In a question relating to Standard of Review, do we just have to fulfill the requirements of the Vavilov test, or do we have to get into the Dore/Loyola Framework as well?

According to Vavilov para 57, the standard of review where the issue on review is whether a provision of the decision maker’s enabling statute violates the Charter should be reviewed on a correctness standard but the Vavilov decision is silent on what to do when the effect of the administrative decision being reviewed is to unjustifiably limit rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We have seen this scenario play out previously when the Supreme Court revived the pragmatic and functional factors without clarifying the faith and future application of the assumptions under Dunsmuir. Just like it was done before, the principle continues to apply until the SCC clarifies its position on its application.

There are however a few issues to reconcile:

Continue reading “Dore/Loyola or Vavilov?” →

Institutions around the world rapidly transitioned to online exams due to the outbreak of COVID 19. The Federation of Law Societies of Canada (FLSC) also joined the trail with its recent announcement that all exams scheduled for August 2020 by the National Committee on Accreditation (NCA) would henceforth be conducted online. With little time to adjust, this announcement was met with mixed feelings.  Some candidates feel it is a welcomed idea particularly as most NCA candidates are in different parts of the world and should not have to travel down to Canada before taking the exams.  Several others are anxious and unsure of how fairly they will perform under the online regime- issues may range from lack of reliable internet access, less typing speed, distractions at home (especially with students with children or with multiple roommates) amongst others. Rightly so, the online exams would pose reasonable challenges as it is with starting anything new. What is however endearing is the willingness of the institutions to accommodate students as much as possible whilst also ensuring academic integrity.

Students received with excitement the news that the time allotted for the exams had been increased by one hour! The exams are now for the duration of 4 hours as opposed to the accustomed 3 hours. In addition to this, students now have the option to –

Continue reading “Online Delivery of the NCA Exams – The Countdown Begins!” →

By: Sam Khajeei & Kenny Okunola | February 26, 2020

The recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the Court) in the case of 2483038 Ontario Inc. v. 2082100 Ontario Inc. (2020 ONSC 475) (the Fit for Life Decision) highlights the importance of ensuring the delivery of a compliant franchise disclosure document (a FDD) upon the grant of a franchise and serves as a reminder to franchisors and their principals of the significant consequences of failing to do so.  

In this case, the franchisee entered into a franchise agreement with the franchisor for the operation of a “Fit for Life” restaurant in Ontario. The franchisee opened for business on or around December 14, 2015 and ceased operating on or around August 11, 2017 after delivering a notice of rescission to the franchisor. The FDD delivered by the franchisor to the franchisee contained a signature block on page 4 of the FDD where there was some corporate information about the franchisor being disclosed. This was where Mr. Samuel Davis (Mr. Davis), the sole director and officer of the franchisor, had signed the FDD rather than the “Certificate of Disclosure” on page 27 of the FDD.

Continue reading “Tales of Flawed Disclosure: The Importance of the FDD Certificate” →