Canada Case Law

NL v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The General Division correctly held that the Commission could rely on s.52(5) of the EI Act because the Commission could reasonably find a false or misleading statement had been made (contradictory claimant reports regarding receipt of wage‑loss indemnity), and the Commission exercised its discretion judicially in reconsidering and allocating the indemnity, so the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Reconsideration time limits
• Overpayment recovery
• Misrepresentation
• Exercise of discretion
• Jurisdiction to write off debt

Read case analysis

CM v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The General Division correctly applied the law that an interruption of earnings requires a seven‑day consecutive cessation; the claimant did not meet that legal test and reliance on erroneous advice does not excuse repayment, so no reviewable error was shown and leave to appeal is refused.

Source excerpt

• Interruption of earnings
• Overpayment and repayment
• Reliance on government advice
• Leave to appeal
• Write-off under s.56

Read case analysis

Amex Bank of Canada v. DaCosta

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the refusal to set aside a default judgment, finding no reversible error in the motion judge’s application of Mountain View.

• Default judgment
• Setting aside judgment
• Procedural law
• Credit card debt
• Costs
• Default-judgment

Read case analysis

Pitters v. Home Trust Company

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed Marlon Pitters’s appeal from a r. 2.01 dismissal, finding no valid mortgage issue and no basis to interfere.

• Rule 2.01 dismissal
• Mortgage dispute
• Costs on appeal
• Appellate review standard
• Appeal-dismissed
• Rule-2-01

Read case analysis

Home Trust Company v. Campbell

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Louise Miner’s motion for an extension of time to “revest and revoke” in an appeal from a mortgage-enforcement matter was dismissed as incomprehensible and irrelevant. Costs were awarded to Home Trust.

• Extension of time
• Stay of enforcement
• Summary judgment
• Opca (organized pseudo-legal commercial arguments)
• Costs
• Extension-of-time

Read case analysis

Kakoutis v. Bank of Nova Scotia

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal refused a stay of eviction pending an attempted Supreme Court of Canada leave application and dismissed the bank’s cross-motion to bar further motions.

• Stay of proceedings
• Eviction/writ of possession
• Abuse of process
• Frivolous and vexatious motions
• Leave to appeal
• Costs

Read case analysis

Royce Presidential Investments Inc. v. Valour Group Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a stay pending appeal after a defence was struck for deficient documentary disclosure and continued non-compliance with a court order.

• Affidavit of documents
• Disclosure obligations
• Strike out of defence
• Stay pending appeal
• Costs
• Stay-pending-appeal

Read case analysis

Cameron Stephens Mortgage Capital Ltd. v. Conacher Kingston Holdings Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal fixed appeal costs at $15,000 each to the receiver, 100 Ontario Inc., and Issam A. Saad after reviewing post-decision submissions.

• Costs
• Apportionment of costs
• Receiver
• Appeal
• Appeal-costs
• Costs-apportionment

Read case analysis

PA v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

Permission to appeal refused because the Applicant failed to identify an arguable reviewable error; the General Division correctly concluded the Commission judicially exercised its discretion in denying an extension of time given the lack of a reasonable explanation and absence of continuing intention, so the appeal has no reasonable chance of success.

Source excerpt

• Reconsideration
• Extension of time
• Notice of debt
• Garnishment
• Credibility
• Discretion

Read case analysis

Bank of Nova Scotia v. Reed

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Appeal dismissed: summary judgment was properly granted because the appellant had access to and relied on the relevant documents and undertakings; the appellant's ongoing acknowledgements and payments restarted the limitation period under s.13 of the Limitations Act; the appellant was not a "consumer" under the CPA because the credit was for farming operations; the FDMA stay does not extend to an appeal brought by the debtor, but enforcement provisions of the underlying judgment are stayed pending mediation.

Source excerpt

• Summary judgment
• Limitation periods
• Consumer protection act application
• Farm debt mediation
• Security enforcement
• Costs

Read case analysis