i
CITED 140 O.R. (3d) RENVOI 140 R.J.O. (3e)
CASES REPORTED
Atos IT Solutions and Services GMBH v. Sapient Canada Inc. ....... (C.A.) 321
Beccarea v. Canadian National Railway Co. ....................................(S.C.J.) 389
Canadian Civil Liberties Assn. v. Canada (Attorney General) ......(S.C.J.) 342
Enterprise Rent-A-Car Canada Ltd. v. Intact Insurance Co. .........(S.C.J.) 396
CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Cruel and unusual treatment or punishment — Inmates — Provi-
sions of Corrections and Conditional Release Act which per-
mit administrative segregation of inmates not violating s. 12
of Charter — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
s. 12 — Corrections and Conditional Release Act, S.C. 1992,
c. 20.
CANADIAN CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSN. V. CANADA
(ATTORNEY GENERAL) ................................................... (S.C.J.) 342
Double jeopardy — Inmates — Provisions of Corrections and Conditional Release Act which permit administrative segregation
of inmates not violating s. 11(h) of Charter — Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(h) — Corrections and
Conditional Release Act, S.C. 1992, c. 20.
CANADIAN CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSN. V. CANADA
(ATTORNEY GENERAL) ................................................... (S.C.J.) 342
Fundamental justice — Inmates — Provisions of Corrections and
Conditional Release Act which permit administrative segregation of inmates unjustifiably violating s. 7 of Charter
because of lack of independent review of decision to segregate
— Sections 31 to 37 of Corrections and Conditional Release
Act invalid to extent that they authorize administrative segregation after fifth working day — Declaration of invalidity
suspended for 12 months — Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, s. 7 — Corrections and Conditional Release Act,
S.C. 1992, c. 20, ss. 31-37.
CANADIAN CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSN. V. CANADA
(ATTORNEY GENERAL) ................................................... (S.C.J.) 342
CONTRACTS
Damages — Limitation of liability — Exclusion clause in contract
limiting damages to “direct damages only” and providing “for
greater certainty” that neither party would be liable to other
for “indirect, special, consequential or punitive damages
or for loss of profits” — Trial judge reasonably interpreting
that clause as only excluding damages for consequential or
indirect lost profits and as not excluding lost profits which
directly resulted from party’s termination of contract.
ATOS IT SOLUTIONS AND SERVICES GMBH V.
SAPIENT CANADA INC. ...................................................... (C.A.) 321
Damages — Minimum performance principle — Defendant entering into subcontract with plaintiff for provision by plaintiff
of data conversion and application management support
