This domain is a Michael A. Wills domain holdings property and is available for purchase. Contact us or submit your confidential offer to domains at willslaw.ca for consideration and response. Discover more domain properties for sale on our domains for sale listing page.
Quick-check the ahrefs domain rating and link profile: click here.
Minimum offer: $820.00 (USD)
Active Sites Not for Sale
Terminated.Law
Employment lawyer for: wrongful dismissal law
Weclose.Law
Residential real estate lawyer for: residential real estate law
Employer.Law
Management-side employment lawyer for: workplace harassment law
More Top Domains for Sale
Latest Posts from Terminated.Law
- Robinson v Heinz Company: A Claim of Constructive Dismissalby Michael Wills on December 16, 2024
Constructive Dismissal in Leamington: A Closer Look BackgroundThis case stems from H.J. Heinz Company of Canada LP’s decision to close its Leamington, Ontario plant in 2014. Karen Robinson, a long-serving employee with nearly 40 years of tenure, was affected by the plant closure. Although Heinz […]
- Hilton v K & S Services: A Matter of Jurisdictionby Michael Wills on December 14, 2024
Tecumseh Resident Secures Jurisdiction in Ontario for Constructive Dismissal Claim In Hilton v. K & S Services Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed that Ontario courts have jurisdiction over a constructive dismissal claim brought by Craig Hilton, a Tecumseh, Ontario resident, against his […]
- Ontario Employment Standards Act Key Protections: Your Rights Explainedby Michael Wills on December 13, 2024
Introduction The Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) is the cornerstone of workplace rights in Ontario. This legislation outlines the minimum standards employers must meet to ensure fair treatment of employees. Understanding your rights under the ESA empowers you to identify violations and take […]
Latest Posts from Weclose.Law
- Ontario Land Transfer Tax and Closing Costsby Michael Wills on October 31, 2024
Learn about Ontario land transfer tax and closing costs. Weclose helps buyers understand LTT, rebates, and expenses for a transparent home-buying experience. The post Ontario Land Transfer Tax and Closing Costs first appeared on Weclose.
- Calculating Land Transfer Tax in Ontarioby Michael Wills on October 31, 2024
Calculating Land Transfer Tax in Ontario: Learn about tax rates, first-time buyer rebates, and closing costs today. Discover exemptions and rebates. The post Calculating Land Transfer Tax in Ontario first appeared on Weclose.
- Closing Costs for Ontario Homebuyersby Michael Wills on October 31, 2024
Learn about closing costs for Ontario homebuyers with Weclose. From legal fees to title insurance, we guide you through all the expenses for a smooth closing. The post Closing Costs for Ontario Homebuyers first appeared on Weclose.
Recent Decisions from Ontario Court of Appeal
- Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2931 v. Tsatskin, 2025 ONCA 323 (CanLII)on April 24, 2025
Civil procedure — Appeals — Extension of time — Moving parties sought an extension of time to perfect appeals from orders compelling the sale of a condominium and issuing a non-harassment order — Should the moving parties be granted an extension of time? — Governing test for extensions of time includes justice of the case, intention to appeal, length of delay, explanation for delay, merits of appeal, and prejudice to respondentsEvidence — Merits of appeal — Moving parties argued that the sale of a condominium was a disproportionate remedy and that costs were improperly awarded — Did the moving parties demonstrate sufficient merit in their appeals to justify an extension of time? — Appeals found to lack arguable merit under the test for denying extensions based on absence of meritCivil procedure — Delay — Explanation for delay — Moving parties failed to perfect appeals due to deficiencies in materials and failure to submit required orders — Did the moving parties’ delay and explanation for the delay warrant dismissal of their motion? — Delay and unsatisfactory explanation contributed to dismissal when combined with lack of merit and prejudiceCivil procedure — Prejudice — Responding parties sought resolution and peace from harassment — Did the ongoing prejudice to the responding parties justify dismissal of the motion for an extension of time? — Prejudice to responding parties in responding to meritless appeals supported dismissal of the motion
- R. v. Glynn, 2025 ONCA 310 (CanLII)on April 23, 2025
Criminal procedure — Sentencing — Conditional sentence orders — Respondent sentenced to a conditional sentence for trafficking offences despite a global sentence exceeding two years — Did the sentencing judge err in imposing a conditional sentence order contrary to R. v. Fice? — Conditional sentence orders unavailable for global sentences exceeding two years — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 742.1Statutory interpretation — Sentencing — Consecutive sentences — Respondent convicted of participation in a criminal organization — Sentencing judge failed to impose a consecutive sentence for the offence — Did the sentencing judge err in failing to apply section 467.14 of the Criminal Code? — Section 467.14 mandates consecutive sentences for criminal organization offencesCriminal procedure — Restitution orders — Validity — Restitution order imposed to reimburse investigative police agency — Did the sentencing judge err in imposing a restitution order inconsistent with the purpose of restitution under the Criminal Code? — Restitution orders must promote accountability to victims and redress specific harm — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 738Criminal procedure — Appeals — Joint position on remedy — Respondent made significant progress toward rehabilitation and served substantial time under a conditional sentence — Should the Court of Appeal accept the joint position of the parties on the appropriate remedy? — Joint position accepted due to rehabilitation progress, time served, and sentencing principles
- R. v. Swaine, 2025 ONCA 313 (CanLII)on April 23, 2025
Criminal procedure — Interveners in criminal applications — Judicial independence — Administration of justice — Applications under ss. 682 and 683 of the Criminal Code — Leave to intervene granted to the Office of the Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Justice and the Ontario Superior Court Judges’ Association — Did the proposed interveners establish that their participation would provide a useful contribution? — Test for granting leave to intervene in criminal mattersCivil procedure — Interveners — Scope of participation — Terms of intervention — Applications under ss. 682 and 683 of the Criminal Code — Interveners permitted to file factums, rely on materials, and make oral submissions — What is the appropriate scope of participation for interveners in criminal applications? — Rule 30 of the Criminal Appeal Rules governs the extent of intervener participationEvidence — Sealing orders — Fresh evidence applications — Criminal procedure — Crown’s application for a sealing order on future materials filed in relation to ss. 682 and 683 applications — Whether r. 27(10) of the Criminal Appeal Rules mandates a sealing order — Application dismissed as r. 27(10) does not apply to the materials in question