In this section, we provide updates of interest / concern in the legal topic area selected.
PRIVACY TORT: INTRUSION UPON SECLUSION
In Jones v. Tsige (2012), the Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed a lawsuit against a bank worker snooping into the financial records of someone she knew. The tort is often referred to as “intrusion upon seclusion”. Recently, an Ontario court referred to that tort as a “recognized cause of action”
THE ECONOMIC TORT OF “UNLAWFUL MEANS”
The Supreme Court of Canada clarified that the economic tort of unlawful interference is better described as the unlawful means tort: A.I. Enterprises Ltd. v Bram Enterprises Ltd.
The unlawful means tort requires the defendant to have committed an actionable wrong against a third party (not the plaintiff) but that wrong intentionally causes economic harm to the plaintiff. (Conduct is unlawful if that third party could sue or would be actionable if the third party had suffered a resulting loss.)
The unlawful means tort can be pursued along with inducing breach of contract.
See Carducci v. Canada (AG)
THE TORT OF INDUCING BREACH OF CONTRACT
The law recognizes the tort of inducing breach of contract which has also been referred to as the tort of interference with contractual relations.
The four elements of the tort are as follows:
(1) The plaintiff had a valid and enforceable contract with another party (not the defendant but a third party)
(2) The defendant was aware of the existence of this contract
(3) The defendant intended to and did procure the breach of the contract; and
(4) As a result of the breach, the plaintiff suffered damages.
The defense of justification (in an employment case, a non-disclosure or non-competition agreement, for example) might be used by the defendant.
See Park Place Centre Ltd. v. Manga Hotels (Dartmouth) Inc.
CAUTION: No part of this website is legal advice
Copyright 2022, Toronto, All Rights Reserved