{"id":605,"date":"2016-07-13T06:59:44","date_gmt":"2016-07-13T06:59:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ojen.turnbull.co\/?post_type=resource&#038;p=605"},"modified":"2017-01-05T12:59:52","modified_gmt":"2017-01-05T17:59:52","slug":"top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc","status":"publish","type":"resource","link":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc","title":{"rendered":"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Each year at OJEN\u2019s Toronto Summer Law Institute, a judge from the Court of Appeal for Ontario identifies five cases that are of significance in the educational setting. This summary, based on these comments and observations, is appropriate for discussion and debate in the classroom setting.<\/p>\n<h3><em>Richard v Time, Inc.<\/em>, 2012 SCC 8, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 310<\/h3>\n<p>This decision addresses consumer protection and contract law and sets out a process for considering claims of false advertising. In claims of false or misleading advertising, a court must perform a two-step test, which considers the general impression given by representations (statements) made in the ad. The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) clarified the meaning of an advertisement\u2019s \u201cgeneral impression\u201d under section 218 of the Quebec Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and held that the standard for assessing that impression is the perspective of a \u201ccredulous and inexperienced consumer.\u201d The full decision is available <a href=\"http:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/decisia-scc-csc\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/en\/item\/7994\/index.do\" target=\"_blank\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","resource-type":[10],"area-of-law":[15],"subject-area":[18],"grade-level":[24,25],"resource-audience":[],"resource-format":[],"class_list":["post-605","resource","type-resource","status-publish","hentry","resource-type-case-summaries","area-of-law-contract-law","subject-area-law","grade-level-grade-11","grade-level-grade-12"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc - OJEN<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc - OJEN\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Each year at OJEN\u2019s Toronto Summer Law Institute, a judge from the Court of Appeal for Ontario identifies five cases that are of significance in the educational setting. This summary, based on these comments and observations, is appropriate for discussion and debate in the classroom setting. Richard v Time, Inc., 2012 SCC 8, [2010] 2 [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"OJEN\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/OJEN\/252115501467864\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-05T17:59:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@OJEN_ROEJ\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc\",\"name\":\"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc - OJEN\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2016-07-13T06:59:44+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-05T17:59:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/\",\"name\":\"OJEN\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc - OJEN","robots":{"index":"noindex","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc - OJEN","og_description":"Each year at OJEN\u2019s Toronto Summer Law Institute, a judge from the Court of Appeal for Ontario identifies five cases that are of significance in the educational setting. This summary, based on these comments and observations, is appropriate for discussion and debate in the classroom setting. Richard v Time, Inc., 2012 SCC 8, [2010] 2 [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc","og_site_name":"OJEN","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/OJEN\/252115501467864","article_modified_time":"2017-01-05T17:59:52+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_site":"@OJEN_ROEJ","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc","url":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc","name":"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc - OJEN","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-07-13T06:59:44+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-05T17:59:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/resource\/top-five-2012-richard-v-time-inc#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Top Five 2012: Richard v Time, Inc"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/","name":"OJEN","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource\/605"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/resource"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource\/605\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=605"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"resource-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-type?post=605"},{"taxonomy":"area-of-law","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/area-of-law?post=605"},{"taxonomy":"subject-area","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/subject-area?post=605"},{"taxonomy":"grade-level","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/grade-level?post=605"},{"taxonomy":"resource-audience","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-audience?post=605"},{"taxonomy":"resource-format","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ojen2024.turnbull.co\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-format?post=605"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}