Canadian Lawyer

46 J U N E 2 0 1 7 w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m Jordan has been cited more than 288 times in less than a year, ranking it up there with the court's 2014 ruling on con- tractual interpretation in Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp. as a case that rapidly changed the legal landscape. It's unlikely, however, that any of the rulings in the past year will have the same impact as those two cases. Nonetheless, there are some notable rulings, including a few that have flown under the media radar. One of those cases, Meehan says, is British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal) v. Fraser Health Author- ity, which involves health-care workers who claimed under the province's Workers Compensation Act that their breast cancer was an occupational disease. The case fea- tured a fight over causation and evidence, and the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the workers. Meehan says the case is notable because it is "one of the few tort law appeals heard by the Supreme Court in the past few years and it is having a significant impact on the causation analysis applied in personal injury cases." He says it confirms that "causation can be inferred from circumstantial evidence and it is not necessary that a plaintiff prove general causation to the scientific standard. Defendants may, therefore, have a harder time defeating claims on the basis of expert evidence. We'll see how this plays out." A criminal case that is having a big impact is last October's ruling in R. v. Anthony-Cook, which Meehan notes has already been cited more than 135 times by other judges. He calls it "the go-to decision for a trial judge faced with joint submis- sions from Crown and defence counsel. Trial judges should now be very reluctant to reject a joint submission." The Supreme Court's rulings weren't confined to civil or criminal law. In January, the court elaborated on freedom of expres- sion in B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association v. British Columbia (Attorney General), a case dealing with political advertising. The Supreme Court agreed with lower courts that a registra- tion requirement under the B.C. Elections Act on those who buy political advertising infringed on free speech rights, but it was justified under s. 1 of the Charter. The same month, defence lawyers got a boost when dealing with DNA expert evidence. In R. v. Awer, the court quashed a conviction after finding that the trial judge applied different levels of scrutiny to DNA evidence — "none for the Crown expert and intense for the defence expert." The court called that "unwarranted" and noted it "tended to shift the burden of proof onto the appellant." The legal profession also came under scrutiny. In Green v. Law Society of Mani- toba, lawyer Sidney Green lost his fight against being suspended for failing to meet the minimum requirements for manda- tory continuing professional development. Meehan says the Green case is important to regulated professions. "It confirms that self-governing professional bodies are to be given significant deference when it comes to policies and procedures that govern their professions — this includes determining what constitutes public interest." Marijuana was also on the court's mind. R. v. Paterson dealt with "exigent circum- stances" involving warrantless searches. When police responding to a 911 call knocked on the accused's door, he admitted having marijuana roaches in his house and he agreed to give them up and the police said they wouldn't charge him. However, the police forcibly entered his home to seize them only to discover loaded weapons, other drugs and cash. The top court held that the warrantless search was "serious," didn't amount to an "exigent circumstance" to justify entry and was unconstitutional so the evidence was excluded. Meehan says the docket shows the diver- sity of issues that the top court is willing to tackle. "In the past year we've seen the court show that it's really a jack-of-all-trades." Jim Middlemiss is a principal at Web- NewsManagement.com. B A C K PA G E O P I N I O N @JimMiddlemiss By Jim Middlemiss une brings with it the end of the 2016-2017 session of the Supreme Court of Canada, and it's safe to say it's been a busy 10 months for Canada's top judges. At press time (late April), the court had issued 43 rulings since the session opened last September, touching on everything from election advertising laws to DNA evidence, and a wide range of criminal and even corporate mat- ters. Supreme Court of Canada watcher Eugene Meehan, of Supreme Advo- cacy LLP in Ottawa, observes that Canada's top court "is not afraid to tackle extremely complex and highly contentious issues." That was certainly the case last July, when the court issued its ruling in R. v. Jordan, which was the focus of last month's cover story dealing with timely trials. Meehan calls Jordan "the Hollywood equivalent of Beauty and the Beast — on ste- roids." It rocked the administration of justice and put hundreds of cases at risk of being tossed out or dropped because of delay, including murder charges. SCC caps season of diverse legal cases J THE COURT HAD ISSUED 43 RULINGS SINCE THE SESSION OPENED LAST SEPTEMBER, TOUCHING ON EVERYTHING FROM ELECTION ADVERTISING LAWS TO DNA EVIDENCE, AND A WIDE RANGE OF CRIMINAL AND EVEN CORPORATE MATTERS.

• Cover