Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal dismissed WestJet’s appeal, holding it was not plain and obvious that the class action lacked jurisdiction or that federal regulation defeated the claim.
Certification of a proposed class action was deferred pending further evidence that the defendants used a “closet indexing” strategy in managing mutual funds.
The Court of Appeal partly allowed the appeal in this class certification case, struck the unjust enrichment claim, and allowed amendments for breach of contract and restraint of trade issues.
A railway cannot charge demurrage to a non-contracting party; demurrage claims must be founded on an express or implied contract between the carrier and the shipper (tariff publication is necessary but not sufficient); on the facts no implied contract existed between GEXR and the respondents and unjust enrichment was not established; the trial judge did not err in refusing to defer or stay the costs award.
Source excerpt
The lease and option to purchase read together constitute a commercial/quasi-commercial transaction and therefore fall outside the Residential Tenancies Act so the Small Claims Court has jurisdiction to decide the monetary claims; the alleged rent reduction of $500/month in February 2016 is enforceable; absent clear forfeiture language the $17,000 in deposits is presumed refundable and must be set off against $18,000 rent arrears, yielding a net judgment of $1,000 for the Claimant; the Court lacks jurisdiction to order removal of the registered option on title.
Source excerpt
The court struck a property-related civil claim arising from family law proceedings, dismissed the action, and ordered the certificate of pending litigation removed from title.
The court found Pham and her law firm liable on two loan contracts with the Wongs, or alternatively for money had and received, and assessed damages plus costs.
The court refused joinder of two proposed defendants, holding the proposed claims for copyright, conversion and unjust enrichment were frivolous and unsustainable.
The Court of Appeal held the misfeasance claim was not time-barred under the six-year limitation period, but upheld striking the unjust enrichment claim.
Second-phase coverage ruling on whether Lombard had to defend and indemnify Jeremy Poole after a firm associates’ dinner and nightclub incident.
Explore more
