Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an RPD cessation decision, finding the applicants voluntarily returned to Türkiye and reavailed themselves of its protection.
The court corrected the clerical error in the entered Chan Order to restore the intended mechanism of a $125/month equalization payment with annual accounting (not a cap); it applied the 2021 Settlement Agreement and s.7 principles to hold specific items (soccer, guitar, physiotherapy, medical expenses and recommended tutoring) as extraordinary expenses, ordered the respondent to pay his 50% share of past shortfall ($1,111.47) and half of orthodontic cost ($2,500) based on demonstrated need, set new monthly extraordinary equalization at $150 commencing July 15, 2026, imposed monetary sanction…
Source excerpt
The Federal Court struck CILA’s judicial review application, holding it did not disclose a reviewable matter under s. 18.1 and that public interest standing was unavailable.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed Matthew Lucas’s appeal and upheld the Review Board’s decision to continue detention, finding the disposition reasonable and supported by evidence.
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the Crown’s appeal: the Tax Court did not err in awarding enhanced costs (60% of Marine Atlantic’s legal fees) because the Crown’s prolonged refusal to accept BC Ferries findings and its last‑minute filing of the Shimizu affidavit constituted conduct that unnecessarily lengthened and increased the cost of the proceeding and justified compensation and deterrence; the Tax Court’s quantum was within its discretion and not unprincipled for lack of comparative citations.
Source excerpt
Plaintiff did not consent to entry or removal of the tree; the trespass was committed by third parties at the direction and for the benefit of the defendant and her partner; defendant knowingly assisted by seeking an arborist and paying the cutter and thus acted in furtherance of a common design, making her a joint tortfeasor. Compensatory damages awarded for restoration ($41,776) and loss of amenity ($10,000); special damages for air conditioning rejected for lack of mitigation and evidentiary support; punitive damages awarded ($10,000) for deterrence and denunciation.
Source excerpt
The Application for Judicial Review is dismissed because it was brought after the limitation period under Rule 7.05 had run (communication occurred in April 2024) and it amounts to a collateral attack and abuse of process in light of Justice Murray's prior, final decision in PtH 538503 which addressed timeliness and refused to extend time; mandamus was not available and the factual record did not justify reopening issues already decided.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal's finding that race and colour were factors in the City's decisions to suspend and terminate Mema was reasonable and supported by the evidentiary record; the chambers judge correctly dismissed the petition for judicial review and this Court will dismiss the appeal, deferring to the Tribunal's factual inferences and concluding any minor factual error was not material to the result.
Source excerpt
The Court found two aspects of the adjudicator's decision unreasonable: (1) it was unreasonable to conclude the City did not need case study addresses to scrutinize Coriolis' financial modelling given the adjudicator accepted Coriolis would cease providing addresses; and (2) it was unreasonable to conclude the pro formas and addresses were not information "about" the owners of the case study properties under s.21(1). The Court set aside the adjudicator's decision in part and remitted the matter to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner to reconsider and complete the analyses u…
Source excerpt
Federal Court granted judicial review of a refugee/permanent residence refusal, finding the decision relied on uncited evidence, misapplied the refugee test, and ignored a central allegation.
Explore more
