Jaye Hooper has practiced in Ottawa since her call to the bar in 2001. Although most cases settle, Jaye has extensive trial experience as well as dozens of appearances on motions and appeals. Her most recent successes include defeating an aggressive motion to encroach a $33 million property as well as an employment trial involving a disgruntled employee claiming to be a partner and seeking profits of the business. Jaye has appeared before all levels of court including the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada.
Individual clients appreciate Jaye’s accessibility. She is able to explain the often-intimidating world of litigation and walk her client through every step of the process. Institutional clients respect her ability to critically assess a file and identify the most pragmatic approach to reaching resolution, whether outside of court or by trial.
Jaye is an active member in the legal community. She served as President on the executive of the County of Carleton Law Association (CCLA) for the 2012-2013 term and continues to participate in various committees including the Federation of Law Associations, a provincial body representing the interests of the practicing bar in Ontario. Jaye is 1st vice chair of that organization in November 2015 and will become chair in May 2017.
Personally, Jaye and her husband Paul have a very rich life enjoying their four children. Jaye lives in the Westboro community and has been active in local initiatives including the rebuilding of Broadview Public School.
In this interlocutory motion for productions, Jaye Hooper represented a Plaintiff seeking the production of the Crown’s file relating to this fatal motor vehicle accident. The Defendant’s resistance was unwarranted and instead of accepting the refusal, Ms. Hooper brought a motion to compel the production of this file. Ms. Hooper was completely successful with costs awarded against the Defendant.
Lageveen v. DeHaas 2013 ONSC 4482
This unusual employment case involved a claim of partnership by the Plaintiff. After eight days of trial, Jaye Hooper successfully argued that none of the allegations raised by the Plaintiff had any merit and the claim was completely dismissed for the employer.
Interrent v. 1167750 Ontario, 2013 ONSC 4746
This interlocutory motion for a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) sought to tie up a $33 million property in the Ottawa area. Jaye Hooper was not only successful in convincing the court that a CPL was inappropriate, but the merits of the underlying action were questionable.
1310210 Ontario Inc. v. 1394918 Ontario Ltd. et al. 2011 ONSC 5669
In this motion for security for costs under Rule 56.01, Jaye Hooper along with counsel for the co-defendants successfully obtained an order for $165,000 in security for costs to be paid by the Plaintiff before any further step could be taken.
(Canada) Attorney General v. Ranger, 2011 ONSC 3196
In this case involving a slip and fall of a letter carrier on a homeowner's property, Jaye Hooper brought a motion for summary judgment following discoveries on the basis that there was no evidence the homeowners fell below the standard of care. Justice Power reviewed many cases involving winter conditions and agreed that given the evidence, a trial judge would not be in any better position than he was on this motion. He dismissed the case against the homeowners with costs.
Magas v. Pasanen (2009) ONCA 302
Jaye Hooper successfully defended numerous allegations against the police including the negligent investigation both at trial and before the Ontario Court of Appeal. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was sought and dismissed.
Warren Stroud and Russell Kronick (Trustees) v. 132305 Canada Inc., 2007 ONCA 178
This appeal upheld the underlying decision in which Jaye Hooper successfully argued that years of delay prevented the Plaintiff from bring the application to set aside an ex parte order of the Master. The property had been sold following that ex parte order and the court accepted that the unexplained delay and detrimental affect on a bona fide purchaser outweighed any argument made by the Applicant.
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Herbison (2007) 3 S.C.R. 393
Jaye Hooper and Mark Charron successfully appealed a Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court of Canada on the “use and operation” of a motor vehicle that arose out of an unusual hunting accident.
This was a classic David-and-Goliath scenario. Mr. Ward was terminated by one of the country's largest financial institutions after 30 years of service-and had his retirement monies withheld. Eric Williams led the team that successfully represented Mr. Ward's case: the defendant corporation was ordered to pay Mr. Ward what he was owed as well as damages for breach of contract and fiduciary duty-and the second-highest punitive damages ever awarded in a commercial case in Canada.
Zorn-Smith v. Bank of Montreal, 2003 CanLII 28775 (ON SC)
Jaye Hooper represented the plaintiff in Canada’s first wrongful dismissal case to see damages awarded to an employee for burnout.