Canada Case Law

Lees v. Parker

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

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

• Trespass
• Joint tortfeasor
• Consent
• Mistake
• Damages
• Punitive damages

Read case analysis

Linders v. Ordinelli

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Because the parties had agreed the quantum of damages was $125,000, the court treated that as the 'amount involved' under Tariff A, applied Scale 2 ($12,250) plus $2,000 per trial day ($4,000) for a pre-multiplier total of $16,250, and increased the tariff by 50% under Rule 10.09 because the defendants' formal offer dated July 15, 2024 was made after setting down but before the Finish Date, yielding an award of $23,125; $750 in reasonable disbursements were also awarded; the plaintiff's hardship claim was rejected for lack of evidence and the defendants' formal offers qualified under Rule 10.…

Source excerpt

• Party and party costs
• Formal offer to settle (rule 10)
• Tariff of costs (tariff a)
• Severance of liability and damages
• Impecuniosity and relief from costs

Read case analysis

Yin v. Zhang Estate

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Extension of time was granted because appellants demonstrated a continued bona fide intention to appeal, respondents would not be unduly prejudiced by the delay, and it was in the interests of justice to decide the appeal on its merits; security for costs was ordered because appellants are in precarious financial circumstances, there is a real risk of non-recovery, the appeal's merits are weak, and the balance of prejudice favours requiring security for both the appeal and the Supreme Court proceedings.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time to file appeal record and factum
• Security for costs of appeal and trial
• Substitutional service and adding non-parties
• Stay of enforcement
• Remedial constructive trust
• Punitive damages

Read case analysis

Bhatti v. Parmar

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The appeals were dismissed because the appellant failed to comply with the court-ordered extension to file the appeal record and transcripts, did not demonstrate a continuing bona fide intention to prosecute the appeals, caused ongoing prejudice to the respondent (including the stay of the divorce and restrictions on property), and identified no arguable errors justifying continued delay; dismissal under s.36(c) of the Court of Appeal Act was in the interests of justice.

Source excerpt

• Dismissal for abandonment
• Extension of time
• Prejudice by delay
• Davies criteria
• Stay of divorce pending appeal
• Certificate of pending litigation

Read case analysis

Omega Formwork Inc. v. 778938 Ontario Limited

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

In Nova Scotia interlocutory procedural orders are not automatically subject to res judicata; however, a second motion to revisit consolidation may proceed only on judicial discretion and where the moving party shows a material change in circumstances or new evidence that seriously justifies reconsideration; Rule 37.05 permits severing parts of a proceeding including previously consolidated actions when that threshold is met; Omega failed to meet the threshold and the application to unwind consolidation was an abuse of process and therefore dismissed with costs.

Source excerpt

• Consolidation
• Severance
• Case management
• Interlocutory motions
• Res judicata
• Issue estoppel

Read case analysis

Herzig v. Golowko

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The plaintiff failed to prove undue hardship or the necessity of additional expert evidence: financial disclosure was insufficient to establish inability to pay or the real sacrifice required, and the proposed non-orthopaedic experts were premature and unnecessary given that recommended treatment (physiotherapy) and diagnostic imaging (MRA) had not been undertaken and the orthopaedic opinion indicated ongoing ability to work and no progressive deterioration; therefore the DEER exclusion and leave under Evidence Act s.12.1 are denied.

Source excerpt

• Disbursements and expert evidence regulation (deer)
• Evidence act s.12.1 leave for additional experts
• Undue hardship test
• Expert evidence limits
• Future wage loss valuation
• Proportionality and 'skin in the game'

Read case analysis

Bilin v. Sidhu

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Applying Rule 14-1(3) and related authority, the registrar concluded that defendant Hardip's repeated disclosure failures, lack of candour and fabricated/reconstructed evidence unjustifiably lengthened the litigation and warranted special costs. The registrar allowed special costs for the action through assessment but applied a small reduction to the amount claimed to account for fees potentially attributable to appearances for which costs were not awarded or for appeals. The proper award after assessment was $260,000 inclusive of disbursements, taxes and assessment costs, and the registrar d…

Source excerpt

• Promissory note
• Resulting trust
• Special costs
• Disclosure and discovery
• Certificate of pending litigation
• Costs assessment

Read case analysis

Williamson v. Brandt Tractor Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Ontario Court of Appeal partially allowed an employment appeal, upheld the finding of no just cause and no failure to mitigate, but reduced damages by $32,881.43.

• Wrongful dismissal
• Just cause
• Mitigation of damages
• Notice period
• Costs
• Wrongful-dismissal

Read case analysis

McCain Foods Limited v. J.R. Simplot Company

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court did not commit a palpable and overriding error in its factual appreciation of expert evidence and common general knowledge; 'high electric field' in Claim 1 is properly understood by a skilled person at the date of publication to refer to electric fields in the range of about 2 to 200 V/cm, which excludes Simplot's pulsed electric field systems, and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Claim construction
• Infringement
• Invalidity
• Utility
• Person skilled in the art
• Standard of review

Read case analysis

Nouhi v. Pourtaghi

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the defendants had not complied with the registrar's production order and had filed misleading affidavits, but the non-compliance did not warrant a permanent stay or striking of the special costs award; the appropriate course is to dismiss the application, refer the matter back to Registrar Gaily to implement tailored disclosure and case management, and allow the defendants a further opportunity to comply while ordering each party to bear their own costs.

Source excerpt

• Special costs assessment
• Solicitor-client privilege
• Document production
• Stay and striking remedies
• Registrar jurisdiction
• Proportionality of sanctions

Read case analysis