Canada Case Law

Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v Rogers Communications Inc. - 2026 Comp Trib 16 - Order - CT-2024-012

Court

Competition Tribunal

The Tribunal concluded that the Confidentiality Order from the prior proceeding continues to apply to the TELUS records compelled under the Federal Court s.11 order and that the two specific documents subpoenaed from TELUS should be treated identically; accordingly the TELUS records listed in the joint exhaustive list and the two subpoenaed documents are designated Confidential - Level A and remain subject to the prior confidentiality protections.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality
• Third‑party records
• Subpoena
• Conduct review (s.74.1)
• Production under s.11

Read case analysis

Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Sharif

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court granted judicial review of an immigration detention release order and partly of a production order, returning both matters to the Immigration Division.

• Production orders
• Detention review
• Single journey documents (sjd)
• Nexus to immigration purpose
• Disclosure obligations
• Stay orders

Read case analysis

R. v. Wetmore

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The Court allowed the appeal because the trial judge erred in law by finding an implicit waiver and marked indifference: the May 2023 adjournment was legitimate given late Crown changes, acceptance of the only available dates and counsel’s booked trial commitments did not constitute clear, informed waiver or marked indifference, the ensuing delay was primarily attributable to the Crown and the appellant’s s.11(b) rights were breached, warranting a stay of proceedings.

Source excerpt

• Unreasonable trial delay
• Waiver of delay
• Marked indifference to delay
• Adjournment and scheduling
• Jordan framework
• Publication ban (s.486.4 criminal code)

Read case analysis

Richards v. Correctional Service Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal partly granted a disclosure motion in this retaliation complaint, ordering CSC to disclose any maintenance logs or confirm none exist, but rejecting broader requests as speculative.

• Retaliation
• Pre-hearing disclosure
• Production of documents
• Fishing expedition
• Scope of complaint
• Pre-hearing-disclosure

Read case analysis

Richards v. Correctional Service Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal allowed CSC’s motion and dismissed Ryan Richards’s complaints after finding repeated non-compliance with orders, continued abuse of process, and no adequate lesser remedy.

• Abuse of process
• Implied undertaking/confidentiality
• Dismissal for non-compliance
• Allegations of bias
• Remedial orders
• Abuse-of-process

Read case analysis

Rogers - Reasons for Order and Order on a motion for additional production

Court

Competition Tribunal

The Tribunal denied production of the Commissioner’s Unlimited Plan Records because the timing and internal rationale of the Commissioner’s investigative steps and decisions to pursue or not pursue other providers are not relevant to the matters in issue; the Tribunal granted production in part of Third-Party Records because marketing plans, reports, research, competitive assessments, assessments of competitive impact and complaint-related communications from Bell, Telus and other third parties are relevant to consumer understanding and the Commissioner’s pleading of aggravating factors, and…

Source excerpt

• Misleading advertising
• Discovery and production
• Proportionality of disclosure
• Section 11 production orders
• Third-party records

Read case analysis

Kanzki v. Bank of Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal dismissed a recusal motion, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias in case management decisions about disclosure, witnesses, extensions, and hearing dates.

• Reasonable apprehension of bias
• Case management
• Disclosure and privilege
• Confidentiality orders
• Scheduling and extensions
• Reasonable-apprehension-of-bias

Read case analysis

MacKinnon v. MacKinnon

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court held that the Matrimonial Property Act does not apply to parties who were never married but that the appropriate remedy was to permit amendment of the applicant's pleadings to properly advance common‑law property claims and to correct clerical references to the MPA under the slip rule; the court declined to grant declaratory relief or a stay because it lacked authority to review or set aside orders of another Superior Court judge, there was no established abuse of process or Charter violation warranting extraordinary relief, disclosure had been sufficiently addressed through case ma…

Source excerpt

• Applicability of matrimonial property act to non‑married parties
• Division of property under unjust enrichment/joint family venture/partition act
• Procedural fairness and service
• Disclosure obligations
• Stay of proceedings
• Sealing court documents

Read case analysis

Gardiner v. P.J.C. Land Developments Limited

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The motion to amend was granted because the proposed amendments raised justiciable issues and were not absolutely unsustainable on their face; the plaintiffs failed to prove bad faith or serious non-compensable prejudice resulting from delay or late disclosure of the MOU, and any additional discovery or expense can be compensated by costs; accordingly the judge exercised discretion under Rule 83 to allow the amendments and awarded costs to the defendants.

Source excerpt

• Amendment of pleadings
• Justiciability
• Bad faith in litigation
• Prejudice and costs
• Disclosure obligations

Read case analysis

Ford v. Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court correctly refused to compel disclosure because the appellant failed to show that the requested documents were relevant and necessary to the judicial review relief sought (including a substituted decision) and failed to adduce evidence of procedural defect, so no legal or factual error justified overturning that ruling.

Source excerpt

• Judicial review
• Procedural fairness
• Disclosure and relevance
• Substituted decision
• Rule 317 federal courts rules
• S.220(3.1) income tax act

Read case analysis