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
Court of Appeal upheld a permanent stay of two related actions against Barrick Gold, finding Tanzania was the clearly more appropriate forum and rejecting fresh evidence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that s. 76 of Ontario’s Succession Law Reform Act gives the Divisional Court exclusive jurisdiction.
The Ontario Court of Appeal held it lacked jurisdiction to review a single judge’s refusal to extend time to appeal under s. 678(2) of the Criminal Code.
The Court of Appeal held that a cross-appeal from an arbitral award is subject to the Arbitration Act’s 30-day leave deadline and quashed TDMC’s late application.
Adjudicator found the claim is not grounded in maritime law but in duties owed to the goods' owner once the loader was landed in Halifax; Nova Scotia has a real and substantial connection to the facts under the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act and the Small Claims Court may hear the matter; claimant must present evidence at a scheduled pre-hearing/trial to establish liability.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held the pre-certification order was not an appealable order and quashed the appeal. Alternatively, leave to appeal was refused.
Because no hearing on the merits had occurred and the parties had only engaged in settlement discussions before the hearing commenced, the claimant was entitled to discontinue the Small Claims proceeding; section 15 did not apply and Civil Procedure Rules were only guiding, not determinative; no costs awarded per the Regulations.
Source excerpt
The General Division failed to consider whether the Commission acted judicially in its discretionary reconsideration of benefits; that omission is an error of jurisdiction and requires the matter to be returned to the General Division for a new hearing before a different member to assess judiciality and the underlying misconduct finding.
Source excerpt
On the balance of probabilities the respondent failed to prove a meeting of the minds or sufficient specific terms constituting an agreement that the child would live and attend school in Bridgewater; the child had dual habitual residences between June 2022 and August 2024, and, applying CPR 59.03(2) and prioritizing the child's best interests and convenience, the court concluded it is substantially more convenient to hear the parenting dispute in the Bridgewater judicial district and ordered transfer of the file there.
Source excerpt
Appeal dismissed. The Court held it was not plain and obvious that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction over a landlord’s negligence claim, and that any petitioning error was not fatal.
Explore more
