Sign in
Canada Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Canada Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
4 court collections
Last checked

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Corporate law 2025 BCSC 1554

Michalowski (Trustee) v. Gold Flora Corporation

Court held the fair value of dissenter TPCO shares was USD 0.9847 per share, not the trading price of USD 0.17, in a plan-of-arrangement dissent case.

  • Dissent proceedings
  • Fair value determination
  • Plan of arrangement
  • Fairness opinions
  • Control premium
  • Market efficiency
Read case analysis
Contract law 2024 NSSC 280

JJETS v. Jeha

The court held that Article 3.56 was a broad disclosure warranty and the defendants breached it by failing to disclose the material extent and near-completion status of the Wilson's Gas Pricers Project which materially affected ECS's 2014 profitability; the court also found certain WIP and inventory overstatements ($17,503 invoiced WIP and $1,629.86 unusable inventory) contrary to Articles 3.9 and 3.10. However, the plaintiff failed to prove causation and quantum of loss (no reliable valuation evidence and surplus working capital at closing), therefore all contractual and tort claims were dis…

  • Representations and warranties
  • Disclosure obligations
  • Due diligence
  • Damages
  • Work in process (wip)
  • Inventory accounting
Read case analysis
Tax law 2024 FCA 3

Glencore Canada Corporation v. Canada

The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal; it held the Tax Court’s business-income analysis under s.9(1) involved an extricable legal error but nonetheless concluded the Fees (Commitment Fee and Non-Completion/Break Fee) are includible in computing income under s.12(1)(x) as inducements received in the course of earning income from a business or property, less bid-related deductible expenses; the Non-Completion Fee did not give rise to a capital gain because Falconbridge had no vested right to complete the merger.

  • Business income vs capital
  • Section 12(1)(x) of the income tax act
  • Break fees (non-completion fees)
  • Capital gains
  • Reassessment
Read case analysis
Competition law 2023 Comp Trib 1

Rogers-Shaw - Reasons for Order and Order

The Tribunal found the operative proposed merger to be the three‑way transaction including the Divestiture to Videotron and concluded, on the evidence, that the Merger and Divestiture are not likely to prevent or lessen competition substantially in the consumer wireless markets in Alberta and British Columbia; accordingly the Commissioner’s application under s.92 is dismissed.

  • Section 92 (merger review)
  • Divestiture
  • Efficiencies defence (s.96)
  • Market definition
  • Unilateral effects
  • Coordinated effects
Read case analysis
Competition law 2022 Comp Trib 2

GFL Environmental Inc. - Scheduling Order

The Tribunal approved and issued a detailed scheduling order setting deadlines for mediation, exchange of affidavits of documents and productions, motions on privilege and confidentiality, examinations for discovery (including availability of a judicial member to rule on objections), expert reports and document exchanges, and fixed the evidentiary hearing to commence February 27, 2023 with oral arguments to be heard March 29–31, 2023, finding the schedule appropriate and consistent with the Timelines Direction and subsection 9(2) of the Competition Tribunal Act.

  • Section 92 order
  • Scheduling and timelines
  • Discovery and examinations for discovery
  • Confidentiality designations
  • Expert evidence and efficiencies
Read case analysis
Competition law 2022 Comp Trib 1

Secure Energy Services Inc. - Reasons for Order and Order regarding the Commissioner's Motion to compel answers on discovery

The Tribunal ordered disclosure of the limited witness contact information (Question 1177) as relevant and proportional and subject to Level B confidentiality under Rule 240(b), but declined to order answers to Questions 1230-1254 because they were vague, overbroad and required speculative or hypothetical analysis that Secure was not obliged to create; if Secure already performed such analysis it must produce it subject to privilege and confidentiality protections.

  • Efficacy defence
  • Discovery obligations
  • Divestiture
  • Efficiencies
  • Privacy
  • Confidentiality
Read case analysis
Competition law 2021 Comp Trib 9

Secure Energy Services Inc. - Order amending the scheduling order

The Tribunal, having received the parties' confirmation of availability and absent any opposition, amended the Scheduling Order to move the hearing date from March 18, 2022 to March 22, 2022 and left all other provisions unchanged.

  • Section 92 application
  • Scheduling order
  • Confidentiality designations
  • Case management
Read case analysis
Contract law 2021 BCSC 1740

Sequoia Mergers & Acquisitions Corp v. Camacc Systems Inc

The court held that Sequoia was entitled to its success fee after a mutually accepted LOI was signed and the sale later failed for reasons not caused by buyer breach.

  • Brokerage agreement
  • Commission / success fee
  • Letter of intent (loi)
  • Failure to complete clause
  • Contractual interpretation
  • Representations and warranties
Read case analysis
Competition law 2020 Comp Trib 4

Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited - Ordonnance modifiant l'échéancier (traduction)

The Tribunal granted the parties’ agreed, minor modifications to the existing scheduling order as reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances, approved the revised timetable of dates for disclosure, interlocutory motions, examinations, expert reports, mediation and hearing, and scheduled an additional case management conference around 21 May 2020 to reassess the timetable in light of the developing COVID‑19 situation.

  • Section 92 application
  • Scheduling order
  • Case management
  • Disclosure and evidence
  • Covid-19 procedural accommodations
Read case analysis
Contract law 2019 BCSC 2272

Copper North Mining Corp. v. Granite Creek Copper Ltd.

The court dismissed Copper North’s interlocutory injunction application, finding no evidentiary basis for irreparable harm and deciding the balance of convenience favoured Granite.

  • Non-disclosure agreement
  • Standstill provision
  • Interlocutory injunction test
  • Irreparable harm
  • Balance of convenience
  • Full and frank disclosure in ex parte applications
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Canada decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.