by admin | Jun 25, 2015 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law
On June 3, 2015, the Ontario government introduced Bill 113, the Police Record Checks Reform Act, 2015. If passed, the Act would implement a new statutory regime in Ontario governing police checks, which generally describe searches of the Canadian Police Information Centre (“CPIC”) and other applicable police databases to screen an individual for employment, volunteer or other purposes. Changes arising from Bill 113 would include the following:
- Standardization of the police checks that can be requested by individuals, as well as standardization of the information authorized for disclosure for each type of police check. The three types of police checks described in Bill 113 are: criminal record checks, criminal record and judicial matters checks, and vulnerable sector checks. At the present time, police checks are not standardized across Ontario and are instead governed by different procedures established by each respective regional police service.
- Restrictions placed on the release of non-conviction records and mental health information. Non-conviction information would only be disclosed in the context of vulnerable sector checks where individuals are applying to work or volunteer with vulnerable individuals as described in Bill 113. An individual would also be able to request reconsideration of the release of non-criminal/non-conviction records as outlined in Bill 113.
- Police record checks will always be sent to the individual for review before any disclosure of the check to an employer or other organization that requested the police check. After receiving the results of the police check on himself/herself an individual may provide written consent allowing the disclosure of the police check results to another person or individual.
- Authorization to third-party background screening companies to conduct certain types of police checks.
- Bill 113 is modeled on the Ontario Association of the Chiefs of Police’s LEARN Guideline for Police Record Checks, an initiative to standardize the procedures that apply to obtain police checks. The LEARN Guidelines were first introduced in March 2011 and updated in June 2014.
by admin | Jun 25, 2015 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law
The following paper, entitled Judicial Renderings – Interesting Cases to Consider was presented at the Canadian Bar Association’s National Charity Law Symposium on May 29, 2015. The paper provides an overview and commentary on some of the more important Canadian and international court decisions impacting charities and not-for-profits from the past year. It considers case law in a range of areas including the relationship between political purposes and charitable purposes, advancement and freedom of religion, directors’ liability, estate gifts, and charitable receipting issues. It is clear from the depth and breadth of the issues raised in the cases summarized that the judicial renderings over the past twelve months have been particularly fruitful. It is important for those working in the charitable and not-for-profit sectors to be aware of recent case law in the international context as it may very well serve as bellwethers of trends in charity law that may be coming to Canada at some point in the future.
by Dev User | Jun 24, 2015 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Employment Law, Expertise
CHARITY LAW BULLETIN NO. 367
In Miller v A.B.M. Canada Inc (“Miller”), the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court affirmed an earlier decision from the lower court, in the process providing key insight into how the courts will interpret termination provisions in written employment contracts. On March 19, 2015, Associate Chief Justice Marrocco upheld the trial judge’s reasoning and dismissed the appeal by the former employer, A.B.M. Canada Inc. In the reasons for judgment, the Divisional Court affirmed the original conclusion that the termination clause in question was null and void because it provided lesser benefits than those provided for in the Ontario Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”), despite the fact that the clause adequately considered the minimum notice period. The decision in Miller therefore underscores the importance of including all forms of remuneration in a termination clause, including benefits. If employers fail to do so they run the risk of having the termination clause declared unenforceable.
The decision also emphasizes that any ambiguity in contract clauses will likely be interpreted in favour of the employee. As such, the case stands as a warning to all employers, including charities and not-for-profits, about the importance of ensuring that termination clauses in employment contracts do not undercut the ESA minimum provisions. If such clauses do not reflect ESA minimum requirements, common law notice periods will apply. This Charity Law Bulletin summarizes the comments from both court decisions in Miller.
by admin | May 28, 2015 | Charity & Not-for-Profit Law, Intellectual Property Law
As of May 6, 2015, .ngo and .ong domain names are now available for use by charities, non-governmental
organizations (“NGOs”) and not-for-profits in Canada and around the world. These new domain names provide a unique way for charities and not-for-profits to portray and distinguish their work in an increasingly crowded online world. Public Interest Registry (“PRI”), the entity that administers the .org domain name, launched the .ngo and .ong domain names in response to concerns from the sector about the need for a closed domain that would help donors immediately know if a website was legitimate and, therefore, feel confident in supporting the organization.
PRI launched the .ngo and .ong domain names in conjunction with its new global OnGood directory of NGOs. Organizations that qualify for and purchase the new domain names will receive both a .ngo (for English users) and .ong (for Romance languages, including French and Spanish) domain name, as well as a customizable online profile on the searchable OnGood directory. This profile allows charities and notfor-profits to showcase their work, collect donations, and link to their other online and social media presence. The database is meant to have a global reach and create a community of like-minded organizations.
Because credibility and donor trust were two significant factors in the push to create the new domain names, PRI has established a validation process that organizations must complete before they can register a .ngo or .ong domain name. Unlike the .org domain name, which can be used by individuals, not-forprofits, or corporations, in order to qualify for a .ngo and .ong domain name, potential registrants must self-certify that they meet seven eligibility criteria. Additionally, the registrant must provide either a registration number, if it is already registered with a NGO or charitable body, such as Canada Revenue Agency, or a supporting letter of reference if no such documentation is available. The seven eligibility criteria require that the organization:
- focuses on acting in the public interest;
- does not recognize profits or retain earnings;
- has limited government influence;
- has staff/members who are independent actors and are not parts of political parties;
- actively and regularly pursues its mission;
- operates in a structured manner; and
- acts with integrity within the bounds of law.
PRI will conduct regular reviews to ensure that organizations with a .ngo or a .ong domain name
continue to meet the eligibility criteria.
The new domain names provide an interesting new opportunity for charities and not-for-profits to further establish their online presence and portray themselves to potential donors in a new light. As the new domain names become increasingly recognizable, it is likely that donors will gravitate towards the names. Already, in the first two weeks of availability, over 500 organizations are profiled on the OnGood directory and over 1400 .ngo and .ong domain names have been registered.
