Lauder v The Owners: Condominium Plan No. 932 1565, 2021 ABQB

 

Perhaps this is a case of a modern-day Cassandra.  Cassandra was a Greek mythological priestess who was cursed to utter true prophecies, but who was never to be believed.  That would seem to be how the applicant, Ms. Lauder, must feel.  She repeatedly made complaints of leaking windows – not prophecies, but nonetheless cautioning the Board of Directors of a serious issue, and her continued complaints were eventually ignored.

 

Huff v Zuk, 2021 ABCA

 

The appellant, Michael Zuk, is a dentist with a long history of involvement in disputes with the Alberta Dental Association and College over the advertising guidelines imposed on dentists. The respondent, Robert Huff, served as chair of the advertising committee that drafted the guidelines to ensure compliance with the College’s Code of Ethics. Dr. Huff successfully sued Dr. Zuk for defamatory statements made when Dr. Zuk criticized the people who prepared advertising guidelines, including Dr. Huff, and when Dr. Zuk alleged that Dr. Huff engaged in inappropriate sexual touching. Dr. Zuk now appeals the trial judgment awarding damages to Dr. Huff. In the main, his grounds of appeal allege error in the trial judge’s findings of fact and in the exercise of her discretion.

 

0678786 BC Ltd v Bennett Jones LLP, 2021 ABCA 

 

The issue on this appeal is whether the solicitor and client privilege that is admitted to exist over certain notes prepared by a solicitor has been waived, or is otherwise unenforceable. The unusual feature of the action is that the “client” that holds the solicitor and client privilege is also a law firm.

Warlow v. Sadeghi, 2021 BCCA

 

The appellant suffered permanent nerve damage from a wisdom tooth extraction. She sued the surgeon for having failed to adequately inform her of the risk of potentially permanent nerve pain. The trial judge found that the surgeon had not adequately informed the appellant of the risk of nerve pain; however, the judge went on to find a reasonable person in the appellant’s position would have consented to the surgery even if properly informed and dismissed the claim. The appellant challenges the finding that she would have consented to the surgery even if properly informed.

 

Surespan Structures Ltd. v. Lloyds Underwriters, 2021 BCCA

 

The summary trial judge found that no policy limit applied to the mitigation of loss coverage in a professional liability insurance policy. The judge also found that the respondent was entitled to special costs, subject to certain limitations. The insurers appeal both conclusions. 

 

Harris v Doe #1, 2021 BCSC

 

This action arises out of an accident that is alleged to have taken place between the plaintiff, Mr. Lucian Harris, who was riding a bicycle, and an unidentified motor vehicle and its driver. The liability for the accident is in issue, with Mr. Harris alleging that the driver was negligent and entirely at fault; and ICBC alleging that Mr. Harris was negligent and entirely at fault. A nearby household security camera caught the event on video. The quantification of damages is also in issue.

 

Ahamed v The Great Canadian Landscaping Company Ltd., 2021 BCSC

 

The action arises out of a landscaping project. The plaintiffs hired the defendant to provide labour and materials for the project. The Ahameds allege defendant performed the work poorly and without proper permits. They bring this action in breach of contract, negligence and unjust enrichment. Many interesting aspects discussed including pure economic loss.

MiningSky Technology Ltd. v Zhang, 2021 BCSC 

This case arises out of a mining operation, though the mining in question is not of the traditional type.  The “mining” in this case is data mining, also known as cryptocurrency mining.

Haberstock v Borba, 2021 BCSC

 

The question is whether an insurer should be allowed to fundamentally recast the defence on the eve of trial, almost ten years after the accident.

 

Dhanji v The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 2472, 2021 BCSC

 

The petitioners filed a dispute notice (the “Dispute Notice”) with the Civil Resolution Tribunal (“CRT”), seeking various remedies aimed at restraining their strata council from attempting to regulate the petitioners’ use of their strata units for short term accommodations (“STAs”, also referred to by the parties in their CRT filings as short term rentals or “STRs”). Interesting discussions surrounding By laws.

 

Lewis v WestJet Airlines Ltd., 2021 BCSC

 

The plaintiff, Mandalena Lewis, applies to certify her case as a class action pursuant to the Class Proceedings Act, RSBC 1996, c. 50 [CPA]. The action alleges that the defendant, WestJet Airlines Ltd. (“WestJet”), breached the terms of its employment contracts with female flight attendants by failing to create and implement effective policies to prevent and address workplace harassment.