by Dev User | Sep 25, 2017 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Faith-Based Organizations
– CRA News
– The CRA to Update Business Numbers to Provide e-Services Starting in November 2018
– The CRA Releases New Guidance on Head Bodies and Internal Divisions
– Changes to the CRA’s CG-014 CED Guidance
– New Webpage Outlining B.C. Societies Act Transition Process
– Legislation Update
– Bill 154, Cutting Unnecessary Red Tape, 2017
– Bill 149, Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions Act, 2017
– Proposed Amendments to Regulation 79/10 under Long-Term Care Homes Act, 2007
– Proposed Breach of Security Safeguards Regulations under PIPEDA
– Bill 154 – Proposed Amendments to OCA
– Bill 154 to Permit Social Investments in Ontario
– Unfunded Cheque Results in Unenforceable Gift
– Charitable Form Filing Requirements in Quebec
– The Leveraged Donation Program that Led to Charity Losing Its Registered Status
– Proposed Breach of Security Safeguards Regulations under PIPEDA
– Employer’s Right to Require an Independent Medical Examination
– Equifax Breach Demonstrates What Not to Do
– Human Rights Tribunal Upholds Discrimination Decision Against Landlord
– Rowan’s Law Advisory Committee Recommends Action on Concussions
– Court in England Holds Members of Charities as Fiduciaries
– Law Commission Provides Recommendations for Charity Law Reform
– Carters is Pleased to Welcome Michelle E. Baik as a New Associate
September 2017 Charity & NFP Law Update
by Dev User | Sep 25, 2017 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Expertise
After having waited three years since the demise of Bill 85 in May 2014 proposing amendments to the ONCA, it is great news that the Ontario government is again moving forward with the corporate reform for the not-for-profit sector. In this regard, Bill 154, Cutting Unnecessary Red Tape Act, 2017 (“Bill 154”), was introduced on September 14, 2017, proposing changes to the Ontario Corporations Act (“OCA”) and the ONCA, as well as other legislation. The Backgrounder to Bill 154 indicates that the proposed amendments would “enable the future proclamation” of the ONCA and the proposed amendments to the OCA would “enable Ontario not-for-profit corporations to benefit from some of the ONCA features prior to its proclamation, such as allowing notice of members’ meetings to be sent electronically and members’ meetings to be held electronically.” As well, these proposed amendments would “increase flexibility, encourage participation in meetings, provide clarity and reduce burdens and costs for not-for-profit corporations.” This Bulletin highlights key proposed amendments to the OCA, but a detailed review of the proposed changes is outside the scope of this Bulletin. It should be noted that this Bulletin does not review proposed amendments to other statutes contained in Bill 154.
For the balance of this Bulletin, please see Charity & NFP Law Bulletin No. 406.
by Dev User | Sep 25, 2017 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Employment Law, Expertise
On August 25, 2017, the Ontario Court of Appeal denied the leave to appeal application brought by Marcello Bottiglia (the “Applicant”), who sought leave from that court to appeal the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Divisional Court) (the “Court”) decision in Bottiglia v Ottawa Catholic School Board released on May 19, 2017. A previous decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “HRTO”) dated September 4, 2015, and a subsequent request for reconsideration at the HRTO, had dismissed the Applicant’s application for discrimination on the basis of disability, for being required to undergo an independent medical examination (“IME”) at the request of his employer, the Ottawa Catholic School Board (the “OCSB”). The Court’s May 19, 2017 decision denied the application for judicial review and, for the most part, confirmed the findings of the HRTO. This decisions of both the HRTO and the Court clarify when it is appropriate for an employer to require an employee to attend an IME, and when an employee can refuse to participate. The decision is relevant to charities and not-for-profits, as employers, with respect to this challenging issue of accommodating employees who may be suffering from illness or disability.
For the balance of this Bulletin, please see Charity & NFP Law Bulletin No. 408.
by Dev User | Aug 31, 2017 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Faith-Based Organizations
– Tribunal Upholds Religious School Right to Reject Applicants Based on Creed
– CRA News
– New Videos on the CRA Website
– Update to HST/GST Info Sheet GI-121
– CRA Courtesy Calls to Charities
– Legislation Update
– National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
– PHIPA Regulations Update
– Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017
– Implementation of Patients First Act, 2016
– Gender Identity or Expression
– Corporate Update
– Proposed Ontario Regulations Authorizing Charitable Corporations to Pay Directors in Limited Situations
– Proposed Changes to the Voluntary Disclosures Program (VDP) Put in Context
– CRTC Issues Undertaking Under CASL Alleging Personal Liability
– Supreme Court Rules Google Must Block Certain Search Results Globally
– Orders Amending By-laws outside the Jurisdiction of Arbitrators
– Court of Appeal Upholds Clubman’s Veto
– Gender Identity or Expression Now Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination
– Information and Privacy Commissioner Reports on “Big Data” Raises Privacy Concerns
– Anti-Terrorism Law Update
– Court of Appeal Upholds Ruling Against Iran
– Best Lawyers in Canada 2018
– Lexpert Rankings 2017
August 2017 Charity & NFP Law Update
by Dev User | Aug 31, 2017 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Expertise
On July 5, 2017, in HS v The Private Academy, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the “HRTO”) dismissed three applications by a same-sex married couple (the “Parents”) alleging discrimination by an Evangelical Christian school (the “School”) that refused to admit their child into its preschool program. The Parents argued the School discriminated with respect to services against their child because of sex, creed, family status and marital status. However, the School responded that it was entitled to rely on the exemption in section 18 of the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “Code”) because it, as a “special interest organization”, is primarily engaged in serving the interest of persons identified by a particular creed and it is entitled to restrict participation to parents who subscribe to its creed. This decision provides an important precedent concerning the application of the protection contained in section 18 of the Code for organizations primarily dedicated to providing services, goods and facilities to individuals identified by any of the prohibited grounds of discrimination, such as creed, sex, age, marital status, family status or disability, in their specific communities without the obligation to extend equal treatment to the broader public.
For the balance of this Bulletin, please see Church Law Bulletin No. 50.
