Canada Case Law

Wu v. Precision Pulley & Idler Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Plaintiff failed to prove he was incapable of or substantially impeded in managing his affairs for the period required to postpone discovery under s.19 of the Limitation Act; objective evidence (retention of counsel, negotiation and signing of settlement in August 2021, WorkSafeBC benefits ending August 8, 2021, consent to cataract surgery in 2022) shows he was aware and capable; therefore the claim was filed after the expired limitation period and summary dismissal under Rule 9-6 was warranted.

Source excerpt

• Wrongful dismissal
• Set aside settlement
• Discoverability
• Person under a disability
• Summary judgment
• Costs

Read case analysis

Nourifard v. Emadzadeh

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from summary dismissal of a share-trust claim, holding that credibility and factual conflicts meant the limitation issue could not be decided under Rule 9-6.

• Discoverability
• Statute of limitations
• Breach of trust
• Summary judgment under rule 9-6
• Share transfer restrictions
• Equitable lien

Read case analysis

Oddi v. Canada (Revenue Agency)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court granted summary judgment for the CRA, dismissing Albert James Oddi’s action for negligence, fraud, and Charter damages arising from tax assessments and collection steps.

• Assessments and reassessments
• Collection and liens
• Statutory set-off
• Duty of care
• Causation
• Judicial review of discretionary decisions

Read case analysis

Eisler v. Conner, Clark & Lunn Financial Group Ltd

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court adjourned a summary trial application in a contract dispute over settlement agreement payments, finding the record insufficient and the pending appeal risked inconsistent findings.

• Breach of settlement agreement
• Interpretation of contractual vesting
• Meaning of "investment closed"
• Offer and acceptance
• Set-off for costs
• Duty of good faith on appeal

Read case analysis

Hosseinkhani v. QK Fitness Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge correctly concluded on the factual record that the respondents were not negligent because the round dumbbell did not create an unusual hazard and the risk of rolling was obvious, no duty to warn arose, and there was no basis to overturn those findings; accordingly the summary judgment dismissing the appellants’ claims was affirmed.

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Duty to warn
• Assumption of risk/obvious risk
• Exclusion clause
• Summary judgment
• Personal injury

Read case analysis

MEDIchair LP v. Isle Vista Holdings (2001) Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Summary-trial application to enforce a franchise non-compete covenant was dismissed because alleged fundamental breach, clean hands, and covenant issues required trial.

• Non‑compete covenant
• Fundamental breach
• Clean hands doctrine
• Suitability for summary trial
• Geographic and temporal reasonableness
• Risk of inconsistent findings

Read case analysis

Spidell v. LaHave Equipment Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Portions of Winters' discovery recounting communications between Keto and Case were inadmissible double hearsay for lack of proven necessity and reliability; the dealer agreement and undisputed evidence establish LaHave was not Case Canada's agent and there is no evidence of ratification, estoppel or agency by operation of law; Case Canada proved there is no genuine issue of material fact and is entitled to summary judgment dismissing Spidell's claim against it.

Source excerpt

• Summary judgment test
• Principled approach to hearsay
• Agency by contract/ratification/estoppel/operation of law
• Admissibility of double hearsay
• Burden of proving no genuine issue

Read case analysis

Corfu Investments Ltd. v. Oickle

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The RTA, read in context and in light of s.96 jurisprudence and the RTA references, grants the Director exclusive first-instance jurisdiction over matters that are essentially residential tenancy disputes within the ambit of the Act; the pleadings disclose a cause of action that lies within that exclusive jurisdiction, so it was plain and obvious that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction and summary judgment dismissing the action was warranted.

Source excerpt

• Exclusive jurisdiction
• Statutory interpretation
• Residual jurisdiction
• Essential character test
• Attornment

Read case analysis

TJ Inspection Services v. Halifax Shipyards

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Defendant met the threshold for summary disposition by showing no arguable issue of material fact: the undisputed facts established the Topside is a movable chattel resting on temporary supports destined to be set on the seabed, and thus it is neither an "erection" as contemplated by s.6(1) (which targets structures affecting land) nor a "vessel" (not capable of floating or navigation); the Plaintiff therefore had no real chance of success and the lien was vacated/released upon security.

Source excerpt

• Lien validity
• Definition of erection
• Definition of vessel
• Summary judgment standard
• Security for payment into court
• Costs

Read case analysis

The Owners, Strata Plan VIS 3815 v. Polo Pacific et al

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Summary trial application dismissed in a leaky condo dispute because the court found it would be unjust to decide Swiftsure’s liability on the affidavit record alone.

• Rule 18a summary trial
• Duty of care
• Pure economic loss
• Representative standing of strata corporations
• Promoter liability
• Piecemeal litigation and risk of inconsistent findings

Read case analysis