Canada Case Law

Keltic (Prior) Development Limited Partnership v. Van Renesse Investment Company Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck multiple portions of the amended response because, assuming the pleaded facts, they disclosed no reasonable defence, were irrelevant or prejudicial: commercial negotiation precluded contra proferentem arguments; indemnity and "as is" clauses did not permit contracting out of the EMA; a purchase agreement with an indemnity clause is not an insurance contract under the Insurance Act; limitation and offset defences were inadequately pleaded. The court refused to extend time to file the proposed counterclaim because the proposed claim was legally weak, materially different in sub…

Source excerpt

• Indemnity clause
• Contaminated site remediation
• Strike pleadings
• Counterclaim extension
• Contra proferentem
• Duty of utmost good faith

Read case analysis

Evely v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Natural Resources)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The proclamation imposing a province-wide restricted travel zone in all "woods" was unreasonable because the Minister failed to consider Charter rights and values (notably s.6 mobility and related Charter values) as required by Doré and Vavilov; that defective decision-making process rendered the proclamation invalid even if the objective was legitimate.

Source excerpt

• Judicial review
• Mobility rights (s.6 charter)
• Section 7 vagueness
• Doré administrative charter review
• Statutory scope of s.25(1) forests act
• Overbreadth

Read case analysis

West High Yield (W.H.Y.) Resources Ltd. v. Save Record Ridge Action Committee Society

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal was refused because, on the interests of justice, the proposed appeal would not advance the underlying judicial review, some grounds were only arguable or fact‑specific and entitled to deference, the petition was promptly rescheduled for hearing shortly making any appeal likely moot, and the balance of factors (including potential distraction and lack of broader significance) weighed against granting leave.

Source excerpt

• Interlocutory injunction
• Judicial review
• Leave to appeal
• Fresh evidence (palmer)
• Environmental assessment act (designation)
• Mines act and regulatory permits

Read case analysis

Page v. British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff failed to prove that leakage from the PCID caused additional non‑natural water to flood the Page Property; the plaintiff's hearsay evidence lacked reliability and the Golder hydrogeological analysis was undermined by unreliable control piezometer data and omission of relevant flow measurements, whereas the defendants' expert evidence was preferred, so the nuisance claim fails.

Source excerpt

• Private nuisance
• Irrigation ditch leakage
• Water diversion
• Hearsay admissibility (principled exception)
• Expert hydrogeological evidence
• Injunctions

Read case analysis

Canadian National Railway Company v. Kitchener (City)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed CN’s appeal, holding that its coal tar contamination claim was an abuse of process because the same continuing-migration claim had already been dismissed for delay.

• Continuing tort
• Abuse of process
• Summary judgment
• Limitations
• Trial fairness
• Relitigation

Read case analysis

Citizens Against Clearcutting v. Newfoundland and Labrador

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The Court held the Minister’s decisions were reasonable: he considered the statutory consultation material (including five public submissions during the 35‑day s.3(3) period), the Rowe memorandum and inter‑departmental advice, concluded there was no significant public concern specific to the registered 2022 Forestry Plan, imposed release conditions to mitigate issues, and provided a rational chain of analysis sufficient to satisfy the reasonableness standard, so the appeal was dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Environmental assessment
• Significant public concern
• Public consultation
• Standard of review
• Decision‑making reasonableness

Read case analysis

Zuo v. Chen

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Although the trial judge erred in parts of her legal analysis (notably on imputation), the essential findings stand: any representations were not intended to induce the appellant and did not induce her, the broker's alleged negligence was not shown to have caused the appellant's loss, the exclusion of certain expert opinions was harmless to the outcome, and the vendor validly accepted repudiation and recovered agreed damages; accordingly the appeals fail.

Source excerpt

• Fraudulent misrepresentation (deceit)
• Negligent misadvice by real estate broker
• Imputation of agent knowledge to principal
• Admissibility of expert evidence
• Causation in negligence
• Counterclaim for breach of contract; damages vs specific performance

Read case analysis

Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

Judicial review dismissed: the Court upheld ten environmental AMP notices for migratory bird deaths and found no abuse of process in issuing multiple NOVs.

• Administrative monetary penalties
• Abuse of process
• Actus reus and causation
• Tribunal review jurisdiction
• Policy guidance interpretation
• Administrative-monetary-penalties

Read case analysis

Save Record Ridge Action Committee Society v. British Columbia

Save Record Ridge Action Committee Society v. British Columbia (Environment and Parks)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a time‑limited interim injunction because there is a serious question to be tried on whether an environmental assessment was required, SRRACS would suffer irreparable harm if the project commenced (making the petition moot by the 'substantially started' threshold), and the balance of convenience favoured preserving the status quo; accordingly SRRACS must post security of $162,500 and the petition hearing was ordered for the Rossland Assize starting May 5, 2026.

Source excerpt

• Environmental assessment
• Judicial review
• Interim injunction
• Standing
• Statutory interpretation
• Mining permits

Read case analysis

Garnet Valley Agri-Tourism v. British Columbia (Ministry of Mining and Critical Minerals)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The permit was quashed because, on a holistic reasonableness review, the decision‑maker failed to provide a transparent, intelligible and defensible chain of reasoning: the record contains unrefuted expert evidence of likely irreversible ecological harm that the Reasons do not meaningfully address or reconcile with reliance on mitigation; the Reasons did not resolve competing factual submissions about applicable zoning and jurisdiction; the decision relies on unexplained or unavailable internal technical recommendations regarding slope stability; and the post‑decision Reasons materially intro…

Source excerpt

• Judicial review
• Reasonableness standard
• Procedural fairness
• Public consultation
• Environmental assessment
• Land-use planning

Read case analysis