Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 JUNE 2020

Is It Okay For Jurors To Engage In Internet Research During Deliberations? Case Study: Patterson V Peladeau

McCague Borlack LLP
Explore more from McCague Borlack LLP

In Patterson v Peladeau, 2020 ONCA 137, the Ontario Court of Appeal ("ONCA") considered whether Justice Hackland of the Ontario Superior Court

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Jennifer Kelly
Jennifer Kelly
Author LinkedIn connections

In Patterson v Peladeau, 2020 ONCA 137, the Ontario Court of Appeal ("ONCA") considered whether Justice Hackland of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice erred in his decision when he turned down a request for declaring a mistrial based on a juror engaging in Internet research during jury deliberations. Justice Hackland's decision was upheld.

Background Facts

In 2009, the Appellant, Ronald Patterson ("Patterson"), was hit by the Respondent's car while he was standing on a road next to his vehicle. Patterson, his wife, and daughter ("the Appellants") claimed $4 million in damages.

One of the key issues at trial was the apportionment of liability for the accident. During jury deliberations, a jury member revealed he used the Internet to access a regulation, the Fault Determination Rules ("the Rules"). In response, the trial Judge stated that the regulation was irrelevant to the case as it did not deal with liability and reminded the jury that the verdict must be

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

BLG At The SCC – What’s Coming In The Supreme Court’s Fall 2026 Sitting Schedule

The Supreme Court of Canada held its second annual ceremony marking the opening of the judicial year at its temporary home in the West Memorial Building, with Chief Justice highlighting the Court's increased caseload and architectural features. What significant constitutional and legal challenges will the Court address in its fall 2026 session, including cases on firearm regulations, Crown immunity, and vicarious liability?
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Article

Ontario Court Bifurcates Class Action As Practical Approach To Onerous Discovery Demands

An Ontario court granted a motion to bifurcate liability and damages stages in a class action alleging $500 million in hidden fees, finding that extensive documentary production requests were disproportionate and not relevant to determining liability. The decision addresses proportionality concerns in class actions where defendants face onerous discovery demands spanning millions of transactions over a decade.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

The Supreme Court Of Canada Reviews Québec’s Bill 21

Québec's Bill 21, enacted in 2019, bans public sector workers from wearing religious symbols and is shielded from most Charter challenges by the notwithstanding clause. The Supreme Court of Canada is now reviewing this controversial law, with a ruling expected as early as November 2026 or later in 2027. Former Minister of Justice Arif Virani discusses the court's struggle to balance competing constitutional principles in this landmark case.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Torys
Torys
Article

The Coldcard Exploit: Why Victims May Have Two Routes To Recovery

A five-year-old firmware defect in Coldcard hardware wallets has enabled attackers to systematically drain an estimated $116 million in Bitcoin from over 5,200 victims since July 2026. This unprecedented exploit raises critical questions about manufacturer liability and creates two distinct legal pathways for recovery: blockchain tracing against the perpetrators and potential litigation against Canadian manufacturer Coinkite for product defects that undermined the fundamental security promise of devices mar
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP
Article

Copyright Claims on Intellectual Work Property: Employee vs Employer

When a senior software developer secretly creates competing software on his own time, who owns the copyright? The Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Nexus Solutions Inc. v. Krougly clarifies the boundaries of employer ownership over employee-created work, establishing that broad job descriptions alone cannot secure intellectual property rights without clear contractual terms or direct involvement in the creation process.
CanadaIntellectual Property
McCague Borlack LLP
McCague Borlack LLP