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
Decisions matching the current search
The court stayed two civil actions pending related criminal proceedings, finding exceptional circumstances from likely retraumatization of vulnerable plaintiffs and prejudice to justice.
The court found Alex Willness guilty of manslaughter after a Baker Street fight in Nelson. The decision addresses unlawful act manslaughter, causation, credibility, and self-defence.
The court upheld the stay because appellants had access to voluminous, litigation-related privileged materials, failed to rebut the presumption of prejudice by disclosing what was reviewed, and no lesser remedy would cure the ongoing risk to trial fairness and the administration of justice.
Source excerpt
The court held that counsel’s April 11, 2019 email created a binding waiver of post-judgment interest for a defined period of appeal delay, but refused broader relief under the Act.
The court excluded two late expert reports, finding they were not truly responsive under Rule 11-6(4) and did not justify admission under Rule 11-7(6).
In a civil sexual abuse action, the court granted limited anonymity, publication ban, and sealing orders for both sides, tailored to identity information and lasting until trial or further order.
The court held it had inherent jurisdiction to send a mid-trial disclosure application to another judge, where both sides agreed and the application involved potentially prejudicial intercept evidence.
Given the offender's demonstrable remorse, mitigating circumstances including trauma and coercion, lack of prior record, tangible rehabilitation efforts, and the court's assessment that a conditional discharge would not be deleterious to the public interest or undermine general deterrence, the proportionate sentence is an 18‑month conditional discharge with specified statutory and additional conditions.
Source excerpt
The Court upheld the finding that Dorino’s repeated, knowingly repetitious motions to change venue constituted contempt because they were intended to and likely did obstruct the administration of justice; lack of personal service was not fatal where Dorino had actual knowledge and a full opportunity to be heard; the $10,000 fine payable to the estate was improper and set aside (fine, if imposed, should be to the Provincial Treasurer or reconsidered) and the prohibition on further steps was justified but must be limited to require leave of the court.
Source excerpt
The appeal is allowed and a new trial is ordered because defence counsel’s cumulative acts and omissions — not calling or adducing evidence from key witnesses and strategically avoiding cross-examination on the August 10 allegations (with the appellant deferring to counsel) — left the trial judge with an incomplete contextual framework to assess credibility; the proffered affidavits (G.O., L.M., F.P., R.G.) were relevant, reasonably capable of belief and, when taken with trial evidence, could reasonably be expected to have affected the result, producing a miscarriage of justice.
Source excerpt
Explore more
