Archive for the 'Courts' Category

Page 3 of 4

Versadex

Published on June 15, 2009 in Canada, Courts, News and News Media. 0 Comments Tags: , , , .

The recent  controversy surrounding the improper investigation of potential jurors in Ontario has exposed some of the information the government has on Canadians and their contact with the police. One such database is known as Versadex.

National Post editorial board: Ontario stonewalls justice, one mistrial at a time

The Versadex database administered by the Canadian Police Information Centre contains information obtained by police on any call to a private address, even if that call did not lead to an arrest, and appears to contain other informal police annotations concerning individuals. Notes on mental health status are included.

The term Versadex, refers to a  family of products from Ottawa-based Versaterm which produces public safety software.  Versaterm produces Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) software with integrated E911 emergency response, (along with advanced mobile workstations in the patrol vehicles, this puts vital information at police officers’ fingertips) and the Police Records Management System (RMS) for gathering intelligence and disseminating information on involved individuals, businesses, vehicles and locations. The Records Management System (RMS) is the core of the Versadex software suite.  When RMS is fully integrated with both PoliceCAD and the Mobile Workstation they ensure a seamless information flow.

Falsely Accused Can’t Censor Court and Police Records

Published on June 8, 2009 in Canada, Courts, News and Private Investigator. 0 Comments Tags: , , , .

A person falsely accused of a crime in Ontario does not have the right to censor the records lawfully held by the police and by extension, the records held by the courts according to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

This decision is important as it ensures, at least for the time being, that records held by the Ontario criminal courts are available when searching for background information. If this decision went the other way, then many would seek to interpret it  as meaning that copies of the Information and related court documents would in some way be subject to censorship.

Social Sites Subpoenaed

Published on May 27, 2009 in Canada, Courts, Private Investigator and Social Sites. 0 Comments Tags: , , , .

Walmart was permitted by the Colorado courts to subpoena  Facebook, Myspace and Meetup.com for the profiles of several employees that were suing the retailer regarding work related injuries.

I wrote about a similar Canadian case that established that what you find in Google, other search engines, and unrelated Facebook pages may be used as the basis for a motion for the production of the subject’s entire Facebook page as happened in KOURTESIS V. JORIS (2007).  Another Canadian case is Murphy v. Perger, [2007] O.J. No. 5511 (S.C.J.) (QL). These cases are becoming more common and of greater significance as social sites become a larger part of our lives.

Court of Appeal for Ontario RSS Feed

Published on February 18, 2009 in Canada and Courts. 0 Comments Tags: , .

The Court of Appeal for Ontario launched an RSS feed for when:

  • Decisions are added to the decisions page
  • Case lists are available
  • Leave to appeal notifications are posted
  • Non-publication orders and in-camera hearings are announced

Additional feeds are under development and in the future you will be able to subscribe to separate feeds for each service.

Check out this new service at http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/coa/en/rss/index.htm.

Litigation & Competitive Intelligence

Published on December 17, 2008 in Company Research, Competitive Intelligence, Courts and Due Diligence. 0 Comments Tags: , , , .

Litigation may tell you what the target company doesn’t want you to know.

Here are five things to look for when reviewing a company’s legal entanglements:

  • Is the company the target of large scale mass tort actions?
  • Is the company facing class action claims for faulty products and/or services?
  • Is the company facing lawsuits claiming shoddy or unfair business practices?
  • Have employees sued for wrongful dismissal?
  • Are shareholders claiming the company knew about material facts that depressed their stock price and failed to disclose them?

Tort of Negligent Investigation

Published on July 29, 2008 in Canada, Courts and Private Investigator. 0 Comments Tags: , , .

Last year I wrote about the Tort for Negligent Investigations  and how this would reach out and touch a Private Investigation firm in Canada soon.

Private Investigator Sued

The Ontario Court of Appeal has expanded the tort of negligent investigation to allow employees to sue private investigators hired by employers to probe suspected wrongdoing in the workplace. The unanimous ruling by Associate Chief Justice Dennis O’Connor and Justices Marc Rosenberg and Kathryn Feldman extends the newly created tort of negligent investigation to private investigators. This tort was first recognized by the Supreme Court in 2007 as applicable to police.

In Correia v. Canac Kitchens, 2008 ONCA 506 & [2008] O.J. No. 2497, the court has imposed a new duty of care regarding investigators. The plaintiff was an innocent employee mistakenly fired and arrested for theft following a private investigation launched by his employer. His name was confused with that of another employee with a similar name.  The sequence of events that led to erroneous identification of Mr. Correia is summarized in the chronology in paragraph [8].

Every Private Investigator in Canada should pay close attention to this case and the circumstances that gave rise to it.

Polygraph Test Results Inadmissable In Ontario

Published on April 6, 2008 in Canada and Courts. 1 Comment Tags: , , .

The Ontario Divisional Court, ruled in Petti v. George Coppel Jewellers Ltd. that polygraph test results are inadmissible as evidence in Ontario civil court proceedings:

Justice Quinn reviewed the law. He said that evidence that a person has offered to submit to polygraph testing can be admissible, but that was a neutral factor here, since both parties had made such an offer. Secondly, the questions and answers from the testing can be admissible, if they constitute admissions against interest. But the test results themselves are not admissible because they usurp the jurisdiction of the trier of fact. As His Honour said, “the court should not delegate its jurisdiction, even on consent”. Hence, a new trial was ordered.

Polygraphy was disallowed in criminal proceedings in a 1987 ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada.

John J. Furedy, Emeritus Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto, maintains a site opposed to the polygraph that has links to research articles on the efficacy of polygraph tests.

Facebook Intelligence

Published on March 11, 2008 in Canada, Company Research, Courts, Search Engines and Social Sites. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

FI: Facebook Intelligence – Part Deux

Google has begun the indexation of Facebook pages.

The best approach to find Facebook content via Google is not to simply plug in name or keyword(s)…Try adding the keyword, “Facebook” to your initial query.

What the Investigator Must Know About Facebook

In the closed community of Facebook, Google asked permission to index the pages. If you are an Investigator, and your subject is represented, then asking permission to see his or her page is contact with a represented litigant. In Canada, if the opposing litigant is represented by council, then you may not contact him or her in person, by telephone, or electronically. In most cases you have to ask to be listed as a friend to view the subject’s Facebook page. Doing this will be considered improperly making contact with the litigant and whatever you find will be deemed inadmissible.

However, what you find in Google, other search engines, and unrelated Facebook pages may be used as the basis for a motion for the production of the subject’s entire Facebook page as happened in KOURTESIS V. JORIS (2007).

Norwich Order as a Pre-Trial Remedy in Fraud Cases

Published on February 7, 2008 in Canada, Courts, Fraud and Private Investigator. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

An article by John Polyzogopoulos, a partner of Blaney McMurty LLP, in the January 2008 edition of the Commercial Litigation Update explains a Norwich order can help victims of fraud determine what happened to the money.

The recent decision of Justice James Spence in Isofoton S.A. v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank should be of interest to anyone who suspects they may have been the victim of fraud. In that case, Justice Spence granted a Norwich order to obtain the banking records of a party suspected of defrauding the applicant of over $3 million. The unique nature of the disclosure order was that it was directed not to the alleged fraudster, but to the fraudster’s bank. The disclosure order was made to assist the applicant in investigating the fraud and determining what happened to its funds.

The article also illustrates the need for due diligence research prior to entering into an agreement with a previously unknown supplier. Once the victim realised that the supplier was not acting in good faith, they hired a PI who determined that the the supplier was a company without the assets necessary to deliver the contracted goods.

SEC Actions Blog

Published on January 10, 2008 in Company Research, Courts and Sources. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , .

Michael Thomas, a recovering corporate investigator in the Washington, DC-area, who blogs at The Daily Caveat put us onto the Porter Wright SEC Actions blog. This blog is a wealth of information about issues surrounding SEC enforcement actions.

Tort for Negligent Investigations

Published on November 15, 2007 in Canada, Courts, Ethics and Private Investigator. 1 Comment Tags: , , , , , , , .

The Supreme Court of Canada has recognised the tort for incompetent investigation. This area of law has been receiving more attention over the past decade and I expect we will see a case involving a Private Investigator over the next few years. Continue reading ‘Tort for Negligent Investigations’

Privacy & Stupidity

Published on November 8, 2007 in Canada, Courts, Legislation and Privacy. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

The CRA vs. Canadian men
by Karen Selick, National Post Published: Wednesday, November 07, 2007

A wonderful article about the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and the Privacy Act and the infinite stupidity of the bureaucrats enforcing acts written by inept people who do not understand or care about the consequences of the laws they create.

Compelling evidence needed for Anton Piller order

Published on October 28, 2007 in Counterfeit Goods, Courts and Intellectual Property Rights. 0 Comments

In its 2007 decision in Catalyst Partners Inc. v. Meridian Packaging Ltd., [2007] A.J. No. 667 (C.A.), the Alberta Court of Appeal considered what evidence is required to satisfy the criteria for obtaining an Anton Piller order. In overturning the lower court’s decision and setting aside the Anton Piller order in this case, the Court of Appeal made it clear that strong evidence showing a real possibility the defendant will destroy documents is necessary before such an extraordinary order will be granted.

Restrictive covenants enforced against departing employees

Published on October 23, 2007 in Canada, Courts and Industrial Espionage. 0 Comments

From Landon P. Young of Stringer Brisbin Humphrey

Two disgruntled senior employees resign effective immediately without notice. The company is caught off guard. The departing employees join a competitor that has just opened a new office and take a significant chunk of business and support staff with them…

…the employees had signed employment contracts that included restrictive covenants. These covenants enabled Staebler to sue the former employees, as well as their new employer, for damages…

… the (Ontario) judge concluded that the covenants were enforceable…

Disclosure & Canadian Courts

Published on October 6, 2007 in Courts and Legislation. 0 Comments

In Canada, parties to a civil action must disclose all documents in their possession and control that relate to the lawsuit.

This broad documentary disclosure and production requirement has prompted many provinces to adopt an implied undertaking rule that protects parties from improper publication of the disclosure materials. Violation of this undertaking may lead to a conviction for Contempt of Court.

The disclosure material may only be published once it has been exposed in open court in some manner, such as in testimony, as an exhibit, or as part of an affidavit. Of course, the contents of the Discovery transcript may not be published.

Disclosure material and Discovery transcripts do occasionally appear in court files. Whoever handles this material must understand what may be copied and disseminated, and what must remain in the court file. Otherwise somebody may end-up facing an unsympathetic Judge. After all, ignorance is no defense.