Gaming licensing in Ontario – skill or chance?

Gilbertson Davis LLPAdministrative Law0 Comments

Ontario’s Court of Appeal ruled in Play for Fun Studios Inc. v. Ontario (Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario), 2019 ONCA 648 that ‘GotSkill’ is illegal under Ontario’s gaming, alcohol and racing legislation. The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario operates under provincial law controlling the grant of both liquor and gaming licences. The Commission submitted an application on appeal, arguing ‘GotSkill’ was a game of chance or mixed chance and skill, not simply skill. As a game of chance or mixed skill and chance, the regulation of ‘GotSkill’ would fall under the jurisdiction of the Commission. The Appeal Court overturned the lower court’s decision and ruled ‘GotSkill’ was a game of ‘mixed chance and skill’ and was therefore prohibited in unlicensed premises; forcing over 200 licensees to remove ‘GotSkill’ from their premises. The Court heard submissions on whether ‘GotSkill’ was a ‘game of chance’ or a ‘game of skill’ … Read More

Discrimination under Ontario’s Human Rights Code is Restricted to Enumerated Grounds: A Reminder in Stukanov v Paypal Canada Inc.

Yona Gal, J.D., LL.MAdministrative Law, Tribunals0 Comments

A recent decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) serves as a reminder that grounds for discrimination under Ontario’s Human Rights Code (“Code”) are restricted to those enumerated in the Code.  Analogous grounds are not prohibited. In Stukanov v Paypal Canada Inc., 2019 HRTO 386, the HRTO dismissed an application alleging that Paypal discriminated against Canadian residents. Facts The applicant wanted to close his U.S. dollar account with Paypal and have the account money sent to him in U.S. dollars, either by cheque or by direct deposit into his U.S. dollar account at his Toronto bank. Paypal, apparently, would not send a cheque to Canada, and would only deposit money into a Canadian dollar account when sending money to a bank located in Canada. The applicant’s primary allegation was that he cannot receive his Paypal funds in U.S. dollars because he is a Canadian resident.  He claimed that … Read More

An Illegal By-Law in Perelli v. The Town Corporation of Richmond Hill

Janice Perri, B.A. (Summa Cum Laude)Civil Litigation, Contract Disputes, Employment, Summary Judgment0 Comments

Matthew Stroh represented the plaintiff in Perelli v. The Corporation of the Town of Richmond Hill, 2017 ONSC 6062, who was successful on a motion for summary judgment declaring that The Corporation of the Town of Richmond Hill (“the Town”) By-Law 135-14 is illegal. From December 1, 2010 to November 30, 2014, the plaintiff was employed as an elected municipal councillor for Ward 2 of the Town. Upon the completion of his term, the plaintiff was entitled to severance pay, but only received a deducted amount due to the Town By-Law 135-14 (“the By-Law”) that authorized said deduction. The deduction represents the amount charged in postage by the plaintiff to the Town’s corporate account in conducting a survey. Justice Sutherland of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice found the By-Law to be invalid due to lack of statutory authority and void for bad faith. The By-Law was enacted without the plaintiff … Read More

Federal Court of Appeal Considers Reviewing of Evidence in Judicial Review Applications

Peter Neufeld, B. Soc. Sc., J.D.Administrative Law, Appeals, Business Litigation, Civil Litigation, Commercial, Commercial Litigation, Judicial Review0 Comments

In judicial review applications, like most legal proceedings, evidence plays an essential role in securing a successful result. This includes not just the quality of the evidence, but the process through which the court considers that evidence. The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Health), 2018 FCA 147 (“Apotex”) affirms the control accorded to judges when reviewing evidence in judicial review applications.