Canada Case Law

R. v. Cumberland

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Large portions of the accused's 1,174‑paragraph affidavit were inadmissible for the purposes of the abuse of process application because they were irrelevant, minimally probative, opinion, speculation, hearsay, or administrative grievances that do not meet the abuse of process threshold; only material directly tied to alleged breaches of solicitor‑client privilege and prolonged placement in closed confinement (specified paragraphs) were retained as relevant to abuse of process, and many hearsay and argumentative passages were struck; Jordan delay motion is to be heard after resolution of the…

Source excerpt

• Abuse of process
• Stay of proceedings
• Solicitor-client privilege
• Hearsay
• Relevancy and admissibility of affidavits
• Solitary confinement/segregation

Read case analysis

Ewert v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed Jeff Ewert’s motion to appeal an associate judge’s order striking his judicial review application for Rule 301 non-compliance and abuse of process.

• Rule 301 compliance
• Abuse of process
• Motion to strike
• Res judicata/relitigation
• Standard of review
• Rule-301

Read case analysis

John Howard Society of Saskatchewan v. Saskatchewan (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court held that Saskatchewan’s inmate discipline standard of proof, on a balance of probabilities, violates ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter for major disciplinary offences.

• Presumption of innocence
• Standard of proof
• Inmate disciplinary proceedings
• Disciplinary segregation
• Earned remission
• Section 7 charter

Read case analysis

R. v. Sheepway

Court

Yukon Court of Appeal

The Yukon Court of Appeal held that harsh pre-sentencing custody can be considered when setting parole ineligibility above 10 years for second degree murder.

• Parole ineligibility
• Pre-sentencing custody
• Mitigating factors
• Life sentence
• Collateral consequences
• S.745.4 interpretation

Read case analysis

Last v. Correctional Service Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal found that allegations of systemic discrimination were raised in the original complaint and properly elaborated through the investigation report and SOPs; therefore paragraphs 44–51 of the Commission's SOP are within the scope of the complaint and cannot be struck. However, the Tribunal lacks authority to grant the specific $2,000,000 endowment sought in paragraph 105(a) of the complainant's SOP, so that paragraph is struck.

Source excerpt

• Systemic discrimination
• Risk assessment tools and cultural bias
• Security classification
• Remedies and jurisdiction
• Particularization of complaints

Read case analysis

Wilband v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court found that between October 31 and November 28, 2023 the applicant experienced a material deprivation of residual liberty due to daily lockdowns and that he was entitled to at least 30 minutes outdoor exercise on most days; however, habeas corpus release was inappropriate because the evidence was not fresh and daily decisions had become factually moot, so the appropriate relief was a declaratory judgment that many daily lockdown decisions were not reasonable rather than ordering release or Charter s.24 remedies via habeas corpus.

Source excerpt

• Habeas corpus
• Material deprivation of residual liberty
• Lockdowns due to staffing shortages
• Airing court/fresh air entitlement
• Charter s.10(c) and s.24(1)
• Statutory interpretation of correctional services act s.57

Read case analysis

Dorsey v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Majority: Denial of reclassification/transfer did not constitute a deprivation of residual liberty because there was no change in conditions, no new or more restrictive detention and no acquired entitlement to minimum security; consequently habeas corpus was not available to challenge those denials; appeal dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Habeas corpus
• Residual liberty
• Security classification
• Prison transfer
• Charter ss.7/9/10(c)/12
• Grievance procedure

Read case analysis

Sandeson v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General)

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The Court admitted the respondents' fresh evidence under the Palmer test, held the appeal was not moot because the disciplinary record could potentially affect future liberty decisions, and concluded the trial judge properly and afresh assessed procedural fairness, his credibility and fact findings are entitled to deference, and no error requiring intervention was shown; therefore the appeal is dismissed without costs.

Source excerpt

• Procedural fairness
• Fresh evidence
• Mootness
• Disciplinary proceedings
• Standard of review

Read case analysis

Haynes v. Attorney General of Nova Scotia

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Haynes could not show that his conditions were more restrictive than those of the general population because rotational lockdowns were implemented facility-wide due to staffing shortages; therefore he did not establish the distinct form of detention required for habeas corpus relief and his application must be dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Habeas corpus
• Deprivation of liberty
• Conditions of confinement
• Rotational lockdowns
• Staffing shortages
• Remedies

Read case analysis

Rankin v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court held that BMPs are authorized by statute and regulations and, on the facts, the decision to place Rankin on a BMP was reasonable and did not constitute an unlawful deprivation of liberty; Rankin was afforded internal appeal processes (which were exercised and dismissed), the BMP provided at least minimal out-of-cell time and airing court access subject to facility-wide rotational lockdowns, and the combined impact of BMP restrictions and lockdowns, while concerning, did not render the BMP unlawful in this case, therefore the habeas corpus application was dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Habeas corpus
• Behavioral management plan
• Disciplinary sanctions
• Procedural fairness
• Deprivation of liberty
• Airing court access

Read case analysis