Fatigue: Does It Ever Go Away?
Fatigue is such an inadequate word to describe the unutterable weariness that comes on to a person with fibromyalgia or brain injury just because one got up in the morning.
___________________________________________________________________
Court upholds Ontario government’s decision to cancel basic income study
An Ontario court has denied a request that it quash the provincial government’s decision to cancel a basic income pilot project.
___________________________________________________________________
ICBC’s “Meat Chart” Crashes In the BC Supreme Court
Earlier this year ICBC instructed its staff to ignore the law when valuing cases and instead make offers based on an internal injury ‘meat chart’. The result is cases not settling and going to trial.
________________________________________________
SCC decison speaks at length about the expectation of privacy. As we all know, what happens post car accident is intense surveillance and it does involve other individuals who are surveilled without their permission.
33] Similarly, although the surreptitiousness of the observation or recording is an element of the offence in s. 162(1), this does not mean that it can never be considered in assessing whether the person who was observed or recorded had a reasonable expectation of privacy. For example, the fact that a person chose to be secretive about recording another person in a particular situation may support the conclusion that the recording was contrary to the norms regarding privacy and visual recording that exist in that context. However, as with the purpose of the observation or recording, surreptitiousness will only ever be one consideration, among many, to be taken into account in assessing reasonable expectations of privacy; it cannot be allowed to overwhelm the reasonable expectation of privacy analysis. It is possible under s. 162(1) for observation or recording to be done surreptitiously but not in breach of a reasonable expectation of privacy. Conversely, observation or recording that is done openly may breach reasonable expectations of privacy, though because it is not surreptitious, it will not constitute an offence under s. 162(1).
The Supreme Court’s Jarvis ruling delivers a win for privacy, but it’s a missed opportunity for equality
Right to privacy not an all-or-nothing concept, says SCC in voyeurism case