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 Tax Court dismissed an appeal for an eligible dependant amount, holding the appellant remained legally required to pay child support under an unvaried consent order.
La Cour suprême reconnaît le délit d’intimate partner violence fondé sur le contrôle coercitif dans une relation intime et confirme 100 000 $ en dommages compensatoires.
The Supreme Court of Canada recognized a new tort of intimate partner violence, holding that coercive control in a marital relationship can create a distinct civil wrong.
The court corrected the clerical error in the entered Chan Order to restore the intended mechanism of a $125/month equalization payment with annual accounting (not a cap); it applied the 2021 Settlement Agreement and s.7 principles to hold specific items (soccer, guitar, physiotherapy, medical expenses and recommended tutoring) as extraordinary expenses, ordered the respondent to pay his 50% share of past shortfall ($1,111.47) and half of orthodontic cost ($2,500) based on demonstrated need, set new monthly extraordinary equalization at $150 commencing July 15, 2026, imposed monetary sanction…
Source excerpt
La Cour fédérale rejette le contrôle judiciaire d’un refus de demande CH, jugeant raisonnable l’analyse sur l’identité, l’établissement, l’intérêt supérieur des enfants et la preuve médicale.
Denial of respondent's variation application because the Partition Act does not permit variation of a final order; grant of applicant's enforcement motion to ensure compliance with consent orders regarding sale of the Haliburton property; costs awarded to successful party based on reasonableness of fees, complexity, two-day contested hearing, respondent's obstructive conduct, and application of lump sum approach, resulting in 80% of reasonable fees equating to $20,956.
Source excerpt
The court found the Department conducted a reasonable search and the majority of redactions made under s.20(1) were justified given the files' child‑welfare context and third‑party privacy interests; limited disclosure was required — the recorded birthdate on page 1 and the birthdate referenced on page 1399 must be disclosed — and several specific documents were mischaracterized as privileged or exempt and must be unredacted, while other documents were properly withheld under s.16 (privilege), s.14(1) (advice) or s.4(2)(b) (public record/duplicates). The appeal is allowed in part and dismisse…
Source excerpt
The applicant proved unjust enrichment in respect of specific monetary contributions, assumption of renovation debt and unpaid labour linked to the respondent's home, entitling him to a monetary award on a quantum meruit basis of $17,865.65; there was insufficient evidence of a shared intention, economic integration or other indicia of a joint family venture to support proprietary or value‑survived relief, so equitable proprietary remedies were denied.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld an order striking an appellant’s family-law application for prolonged non-disclosure, finding the remedy justified under Rule 1(8).
The appeal is allowed because the trial judge denied the mother natural justice by failing to give timely and adequate notice that her decision-making role might be extinguished, failed to apply the required legal analysis for varying an existing order (no finding of material change in circumstances), and materially misapprehended evidence about the mother's decision-making and cooperation; accordingly the decision-making portion of the order was set aside and the mother reinstated as primary decision-maker subject to consultation obligations with the father and stepfather.
Source excerpt
Explore more
