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 certified a proposed beef price-fixing class action, rejected a pure upstream s. 45 theory, and ordered production of US investigative materials before finishing certification.
Court granted limited non-party document production in three section 8 actions and dismissed requests for non-party discovery, citing Rule 238 unfairness and witness-identification issues.
The court held that each of the six requested undertakings concerns focused, discoverable documents relevant to testing the Minister's pleaded policy under s.245(4) and ordered production (or confirmation of absence) of the specified documents if they exist; broad fishing expeditions remain impermissible and trial admissibility remains for the trial judge.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals and upheld the Tax Court’s disclosure rulings: the Tax Court correctly applied the relevance test and did not palpably err in limiting producible documents to those in the taxpayer's audit file and refusing the overly broad decade‑long production request as a fishing expedition; any reliance on s.241 was ancillary and not central to the decision and the disputed documents were of limited relevance and likely inadmissible at trial.
Source excerpt
The court refused production of a lawyer’s file on creation of the Warke Family Trust, holding the file was solicitor-client privileged and that privilege had not been waived.
Justice Miller did not err in concluding the disputed discovery questions were not relevant to the material issues in the Tax Court appeal because the pleadings did not establish a sufficient connection between the Guidelines' developmental evidence and the disallowance under paragraph 18(1)(a); appellate intervention was not warranted absent a palpable and overriding error and the interlocutory order dismissing the motion to compel answers (and to require a different Crown witness) is upheld.
Source excerpt
The motion is dismissed because the Crown's nominated appeals officer was sufficiently knowledgeable about the assumptions and the Crown's position underlying the reassessments; discovery is limited to facts relevant to the validity of the assessments and not to audit process details, and a nominee need not have first-hand knowledge of the taxpayer's income or expenses.
Source excerpt
The motion judge concluded respondent counsel's interventions, which cued the nominee not to answer and attempted to correct or lead the witness, amounted to improper interference; relevancy for discovery is broad and the disputed questions relate to pleaded assumptions (paragraph 5(f)) and possibly non-privileged material; therefore discovery should be continued and the nominee ordered to answer specified questions, respondent must review T2020 and the rulings file within ten days and advise regarding privilege, paragraph 5(f) will not be struck at this stage, and costs are reserved to the t…
Source excerpt
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed in a family law dispute over a home, support, disclosure, and access enforcement.
Explore more
