The Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) is a non-profit organization created and funded by the Federation of Law Societies of Canada on behalf of its 14 member societies. CanLII is a member of the Free Access to Law Movement, which includes the primary stakeholders involved in free, open publication of law throughout the world.
CanLII offers free public access to approximately 1.6 million documents across nearly 300 case law and legislative databases. It is used by lawyers, legal professionals and the general public, with usage averaging over 20,000 visits per day. The case law database is reportedly growing at a rate of approximately 120,000 new cases each year, 20% of which are historic cases which are included to enrich existing databases.
In April 2014, CanLII launched CanLII Connects, a legal community sourced publication and discussion platform for case law summaries and commentaries.
Yoiu can link to CanLII here;
An absolutely free legal reference library of, amongst other things, Canadian jurisprudence. Almost all Canadian court decisions are stored here on an up-to-date daily basis. It archives all released decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, provincial courts, the Federal Court of Canada, and the Tax Court of Canada. I use it daily. As far as I'm aware it's unique, no other country has an equivalent.
Every Wednesday it gives a listing, called 'What's Hot on CanLII' of the week's three most viewed English-language cases and the most viewed French language case.
For years Meads v Meads had a semi-pemanent lock on one of the three English spots.
Well this week two of the three top English case are occupied by OPCA idiots getting screwed. And, not coincidentally, one was at the Alberta Court of Queens Bench.
And, of course, your diligent reporter Burnaby49 has already reported on one of them;
2017 ABQB 555
And I had read the Freer decision;
R. v. Freer, 2017
But I chose not to write it up because I thought the judge was way too over the top in his purple prose for what was a minor traffic issue. I like clear concise writing. Any decision that starts with a quote from Pope (not THE Pope) already has two strikes against it;
 “A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.” These words of Alexander Pope might again serve us well to be recalled in this case and perhaps in these times when a reminder or restatement of the law appears to be required.
And I bailed at strike three in paragraph 4;
 Thankfully, oral argument on appeal provided some assistance in divining the appellant’s grounds for appeal that were a challenge to decipher from the documentation that had been filed. Whether by pure happenstance or otherwise, the gods thankfully bestowed their kindness and benevolence upon this court as similarly experienced and expressed by O’Donnell, J. in R. v. Duncan 2013 ONCJ 160 (CanLII) at paragraph 20. Ultimately, this court was able to boil down Mr. Freer’s grounds in this case to the following:
No doubt the judge's legal styling was the reason this case made it on the list. Amusement more than instruction. However Gauthier was a solid hit.
I don't want any quibbling from any of you readers how the OPCA litigants in both of these cases lost badly. They always lose badly, that's not the point. They take whatever victories they can wherever they find them and being on CanLII's weekly top three list is a victory of sorts.