As seen on AdvocateDaily.com
A controlled glimpse into the juror process would be beneficial to counsel handling civil cases, Toronto critical injury lawyer John McLeish tells Lawyers Weekly.
In the social media age, Canadian jurors and the legal community at large are divided on whether they can legally discuss the process, their deliberations, and their verdict in civil trials, the article says.
The Criminal Code makes it clear that jurors cannot discuss cases during the trial or after a verdict has been rendered, but when it comes to civil cases, Lawyers Weekly reports, several provinces are mute on the issue. Continue reading
Deanna Zurek suffered soft tissue injuries in a rear-end collision. After a trial, a jury awarded her non-pecuniary general damages, damages for past loss of income, and damages for future care costs. However, it awarded her no damages for future loss of income. Ms. Zurek appealed, citing the trial judge’s erroneous charge to the jury as the reason for the jury’s failure to award damages for future income loss.
The Court of Appeal released its decision in Zurek v. Ferris on November 5, 2010. The Court agreed with Ms. Zurek that many of the trial judge’s comments to the jury were unnecessary and “not germane to the issues the jury had to decide.” It characterized the charge as “unorthodox.” Despite these comments, the Court held that the charge as a whole was fair. It cited the following examples of the trial judge’s attempts to have the jury resolve the issues using relevant evidence: