Aliénation of Affection (Tort)

From Caselaw.Ninja


Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5 (CanLII)[1]

[240] A statutory remedy can also suffice to show that a new nominate tort is unnecessary. For example, in Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology v. Bhadauria, 1981 CanLII 29 (SCC), [1981] 2 S.C.R. 181, at p. 195[2], this Court held that the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1970, c. 318 (“Code”) foreclosed the development of a common law tort based on the same policies embodied in the Code. Similarly, in Frame, at p. 111, the Court declined to create a common law tort concerning alienation of affection in the family context because the legislature had occupied the field through the Children’s Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 68.

[1] [2]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j5k5j>, retrieved on 2020-10-16
  2. 2.0 2.1 Seneca College v. Bhadauria, 1981 CanLII 29 (SCC), [1981] 2 SCR 181, <http://canlii.ca/t/1mjln>, retrieved on 2020-10-16