Canada Case Law

S.T.H. v. Ivanhoe Cambridge Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Defendants admitted liability for assault, battery, false arrest and false imprisonment; on the evidence the guards used excessive and unjustified force causing compensable physical injury and chronic PTSD; plaintiff did not fail to mitigate; aggravated harm is reflected in an augmented non-pecuniary award; Paladin's training and investigatory failures constituted conduct referable to the employer warranting punitive damages against Paladin alone; damages quantified accordingly.

Source excerpt

• Assault and battery
• False arrest
• False imprisonment
• Aggravated damages
• Punitive damages
• Causation

Read case analysis

R. v. J. Cote and Son Excavating Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The corporation was criminally liable under the Westray amendments and s.22.1 due to the collective marked departure by senior officers from required safety standards, including misinterpretation of an engineering certificate and failure to use available shoring; sentencing balanced denunciation and general deterrence with the company's substantial post-incident remedial measures and limited aggravating features, resulting in fines of $400,000 (Count 1) and $100,000 (Count 2) plus 15% victim surcharges ($60,000 and $15,000 respectively) and restitution of $6,246.25, with an installment paymen…

Source excerpt

• Criminal negligence
• Westray amendments
• Organizational sentencing
• Victim surcharge
• Restitution
• Sentencing principles

Read case analysis

Matiko John v. Barrick Gold Corporation

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Court of Appeal upheld a permanent stay of two related actions against Barrick Gold, finding Tanzania was the clearly more appropriate forum and rejecting fresh evidence.

• Forum non conveniens
• Jurisdiction simpliciter
• Presence-based jurisdiction
• Parent company liability
• Aiding and abetting customary international law
• Access to justice

Read case analysis

R. v. J. Cote and Son Excavating Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court convicted J. Cote and Son Excavating Ltd. of criminal negligence causing death and bodily harm after a trench collapse, but acquitted David John Green.

• Criminal negligence causing death
• Criminal negligence causing bodily harm
• Manslaughter (unlawful act)
• Geotechnical certification interpretation
• Trench and excavation safety
• Workers compensation act compliance

Read case analysis

Patel v. Dermaspark Products Inc.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed: the Federal Court's factual findings and credibility determinations were amply supported and not vitiated by palpable and overriding error; the awards of compensatory/statutory damages, punitive damages and compound interest were within judicial discretion and lawful; personal liability of the director was properly imposed under Mentmore; prejudgment interest applies to all damages except the $25,000 awarded as punitive damages.

Source excerpt

• Copyright infringement
• Trademark infringement
• Passing off
• Unfair competition
• Statutory and lump sum damages
• Punitive (exemplary) damages

Read case analysis

Noel v. Spryfield Lumbermart Limited

Court

Nova Scotia Small Claims Court

The claim is dismissed because the sale was an express 'as-is' private sale to which statutory implied warranties did not apply, there was no evidence of knowingly or negligently false representations by the seller or its president sufficient to create personal liability, and therefore no legal duty to compensate the Claimants arose.

Source excerpt

• As-is sale
• Latent defects
• Caveat emptor
• Express and implied warranties
• Statute of limitations (discovery rule)
• Personal liability of corporate officer

Read case analysis

Canadian Pacific Railway Company v. Teamsters Canada Rail Conference

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Appeal allowed; the Federal Court erred as a matter of law by treating civil contempt effectively as strict or absolute liability, by failing to assess subjective intent in the directing minds of the corporation, and by excluding reasonable efforts/due diligence from the intent inquiry; given the uncontested factual findings demonstrating CP's significant steps to comply and absence of deliberate conduct, the contempt findings could not stand and an acquittal was entered.

Source excerpt

• Intent requirement in civil contempt
• Directing mind doctrine
• Reasonable efforts/due diligence defence
• Mandatory vs prohibitory orders in contempt
• Exercise of judicial discretion
• Penalty for corporate contempt

Read case analysis

Malak v. Hanna

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found a common design to defame the plaintiffs, held VTS vicariously liable for Jackman and Paine, awarded damages, and refused disgorgement and an injunction.

• Common design (concerted action)
• Vicarious liability
• Internet defamation
• Aggravated damages
• Punitive damages
• Disgorgement of profits

Read case analysis

R. v. Young

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Documentary, banking and audit evidence established the GST/HST returns and supporting invoices were fabricated and related companies acted in concert; circumstantial and post‑offence conduct (amendments, distribution of refunds) established subjective knowledge and intent beyond a reasonable doubt for fraud (s.380(1)(a)) and for wilfully obtaining refunds (s.327(1)(d)); by operation of s.22.2 individuals named are senior officers/representatives binding corporate liability; conditional stays entered on s.327(1)(a) counts under Keinapple/Lempen.

Source excerpt

• Fraud (s.380 criminal code)
• Excise tax act offences (s.327(1)(a),(d))
• Corporate attribution (s.22.2 criminal code)
• Circumstantial evidence and intent (villaroman)
• Similar fact and post‑offence conduct evidence
• Keinapple principle and conditional stays

Read case analysis

O’Neill v. The Seminary of Christ the King

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court ordered Archbishop Adam Exner to attend as a discovery representative, subject to strict limits and videoconference conditions, finding the medical evidence did not show incompetence.

• Examination for discovery
• Competence to testify
• Medical fitness to testify
• Representative witness selection
• Vicarious liability
• Costs

Read case analysis