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 Federal Court allowed a defence witness to testify by videoconference, ordering document-sharing and privacy protections to reduce prejudice and safeguard the witness.
The Supreme Court held the presidents breached an implied duty to inform and good faith in a business relationship, and upheld damages equal to the lost gain.
A liability-only trial from a two-vehicle left-turn collision in Vancouver. The court found both drivers negligent and apportioned fault 60% to the left-turning driver and 40% to the through driver.
The Federal Court partly allowed judicial review, upholding lost wages and notice but setting aside moral and punitive damages, solicitor-client fees, and most property compensation.
The Supreme Court dismissed appeals over class-action authorization and prescription, holding the motion judge set the bar too high and art. 2926.1(2) C.C.Q. is not forfeiture.
The Supreme Court held a lawyer liable for repeated investment recommendations, reassurances and conflict-of-interest conduct that contributed to clientsâ Ponzi-scheme losses.
The Court held the $1,200 file storage fees were deductible under paragraph 18(1)(a) because they were unavoidable run-off professional obligations referable to income earned in prior years, necessary to protect against liability and to preserve insurance coverage, and therefore were incurred for the purpose of gaining or producing business income; appeal allowed for 2015 taxation year.
Source excerpt
La Cour suprĂȘme confirme la responsabilitĂ© dâĂconolodge pour le vol dâune voiture, mais juge que lâexclusion dâassurance « soin, garde et contrĂŽle » ne sâapplique pas.
Section 197 eliminates the requirement to prove scienter, imposing a form of strict liability on dog owners for mischievous attacks while allowing defenses such as contributory negligence; applying that rule, the defendant is liable for the damage to the claimant's dog but the claimant's failure to leash her dog merits a 50% apportionment, resulting in an award of $750.00 to the claimant.
Source excerpt
The cross-appeal was allowed and the application for judicial review was converted into an action under s.18.4(2) because TeleZone and subsequent jurisprudence permit direct actions for compensation without prior judicial review, the judicial review process could not provide the remedial or evidentiary mechanisms required to determine substantial damages claims, conversion best served access to justice and judicial economy, and the respondent faced limitation and evidentiary obstacles that made conversion necessary.
Source excerpt
Explore more
