thompo69

If they are committed enough to the cause, section 33 (notwithstanding clause) comes to mind.

No worries. Just read the article in full. I find it scary that a sex therapist is giving legal advice -- especially when it's wrong. There's a big difference between something being private property, and having an expectation of privacy....

More likely a bylaw or provincial offence. You don't get tickets for criminal offences.

Actually, having just reviewed the OP again it seems that this is a case of libel and not slander. As such, s.16 does not apply.

I agree with you. My point is that in the broader question of damages in defamation actions, it is a little more complicated than "you don't have to show damages."

Yes, in certain enumerated situations of slander. Reading further: "All other oral statements made that do not fall in the above four categories require the proposed plaintiff to prove that they sustained a loss."

For those who are interested, a more detailed explanation of defamation law in Ontario. The issue regarding demonstrating damages is a little convoluted. The context relates to charities, but much of the explanation and commentary is applicable generally. http://www.carters.ca/pub/bulletin/charity/2007/chylb125.htm

Do you mean D'Arcy McGee's at Elgin/Sparks, or the Highlander Pub on Rideau?

So, we should be happy that crack houses can continue to thrive?

Is this a new building? If you've been told the fees only include exterior maintenance, I think someone is playing games with you, as they would have to include interior maintenance as well, including cleaning. With a new build, there are a few issues that lead to big jumps in fees early in the game. Initial fees are based on a budget prepared by the builder. The first issue is that this budget is usually prepared at the beginning of the build, which is likely a few years before people move in. Thus, by the time folks move in the numbers are a few years out of date. This is compounded by the fact that builders are notorious for low-balling the numbers in the first place to promote sales. When it comes time for the Board to prepare their first budget they now have real numbers to deal with, and must budget accordingly, often leading to significant increases. As an example, I had two years between purchase and registration of my condo, and had an increase of about 20% in condo fees after the first year. Fortunately, our board did a really good job of keeping costs in line so we didn't face a significant increase the next year, but this can be an on-going problem with a poorly run Board. The other thing to keep in mind is that as of next July 1, Ontario will have a Harmonized Sales Tax which, while not applying directly to condo fees, will lead to an increase in costs for many boards leading them to have to increase fees accordingly.

Just to clarify, what antlerman is suggesting is that you make sure that the Corporation has hired a professional property manager. All condos have a Corporation, operated by a Board of Directors consisting of those elected by the owners. Most Boards will hire a property manager to handle the day to day stuff, but some are self-managed, meaning the Board handles the day to day stuff themselves. This can mean lower condo fees as the Board doesn't need to pay a property manager, but more hassles if they don't really know what they're doing. To be clear, a property manager is not a superintendent, although in larger buildings, they may hire an on-site super as well. In general, I would agree with antlerman, but also look into property management companies as they are not all created equal, and in smaller buildings it may be possible to have it effectively self-managed.

There is no way to see if someone has a criminal record even if you do pay a fee. You can only request your OWN criminal record, and depending on the reason you may or may not have to pay a fee.

CK, I believe he means they are advertising on EC. There are a Kayla and Katie listed there. http://www.escorts-canada.com/cgi-bin/ad?id=9389 http://www.escorts-canada.com/cgi-bin/ad?id=9388 And Katie's number is on your list twice. Here's the post one was linked to: http://www.cowboysdiary.info/wordpress/?p=179

I wouldn't say it isn't being enforced, I would say that establishments have an idea of what will and won't be tolerated, and that the bouncer was enforcing that. Just because it is unlikely for a cop to give you ticket for driving 10k over the limit doesn't mean that it is legal to be 1k over.

It may not be the Criminal Code, but just because it's a bylaw doesn't mean it's a tiny slap on the wrist. Fines can be huge, and you can't operate a strip club if they revoke your licence, so consequences can be severe. And as to what the by-law says: 20. No adult entertainment owner or adult entertainment operator shall permit any adult entertainment performer providing live entertainment or services designed to appeal to erotic or sexual appetites or inclinations to touch or be touched by or have physical contact with any other person in any manner whatsoever involving any part of that person?s body.

It's not the liquor licence that's the problem, as much as the fact that it's a strip club. The city has limited the number of strip clubs to the current number, and to their current locations. Essentially, they'd need to find a space that was not just a bar, but a strip club.

Sorry I missed it guys. Hopefully next time.

Bingo, on all points.

I agree that the liquor inspectors can be assholes, but I disagree with you about this case. It sounds pretty cut and dry that they fucked up. Frankly, I think they're lucky they only got a five day suspension.

Here's the ruling from AGCO: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onagc/doc/2009/2009canlii20242/2009canlii20242.html And the decision on sanctions: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onagc/doc/2009/2009canlii29720/2009canlii29720.html

I believe those statistics are restricted to calls responded to, so the arrests wouldn't appear unless they were the result of a call. If it was the result of a patrol, or undercover operation they won't be included there. However, I would have expected some sort of report to his the media

No, I didn't ask up front, and I didn't mean to imply she misled me. There was not an advance discussion of level of service, and when I got there, she was very up front about her restrictions. There was nothing wrong with the service provided, I just prefer something closer to GFE. That being said, she was a sweet girl, and I might very well repeat if I had the urge and wasn't able to find a GFE provider I was familiar with. At least I know what I'd be getting into.

No problem. Figured it was about time that I started giving something back here.

I took one for the team and I would say the pics are real, but they are taken from flattering angles. Don't get me wrong, she's an attractive girl, but the pics make her look much more slim than she actually is. As for service, she's a sweet girl who tries very hard to make sure you are happy, but is far too restrictive for my tastes. Everything safe, no kissing, no DATY, so definitely not GFE.