Canada Case Law

Qualizza v. Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court judge applied the correct Hennelly test and did not commit a palpable and overriding error in finding the appellants failed to show intention to appeal, arguable merit, lack of prejudice, or a reasonable explanation for the 29-day delay; the appellants also relied on documents not before the judge and improperly attempted to tender new evidence on appeal without leave, and the affidavit of counsel was improperly relied upon as evidence; accordingly the extension of time was properly refused and the appeal dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Leave to appeal
• Judicial deference and standard of review
• Misfeasance in public office
• Charter challenges
• Grievance process under national defence act

Read case analysis

Thomas v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

Class certification granted in a Federal Court action alleging CAF mental-health stigma, systemic negligence, and Charter equality breaches; s.7 and fiduciary duty claims were not certified.

• Certification
• Jurisdiction to decline in favour of internal remedies
• Crown immunity (clpa s.9)
• Mental health stigmatization
• Negligence (systemic)
• Charter s.15 equality

Read case analysis

Ritchie v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Fresh email evidence was not admitted because it was not practically conclusive of any issue; the CHRC's reliance on the investigator's report and decision not to refer the complaint to the Tribunal was reasonable and within the range of acceptable outcomes; the CHRC did not breach procedural fairness (ten‑page limit and disclosure practices were not prejudicial), and therefore the Federal Court's dismissal of the application for judicial review was upheld.

Source excerpt

• Judicial review
• Procedural fairness
• Confidentiality
• Investigation adequacy
• Sexual orientation discrimination

Read case analysis

Brauer v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court quashed TBS’s refusal to treat Bon Accord as a depressed market under the CFIRP, finding the decision unreasonable and sending it back for reconsideration.

• Home equity assistance
• Cfirp directive
• Depressed market designation
• Standard of review
• Policy interpretation
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

Moodie v. Canada

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court struck Anthony Moodie’s claim as premature, holding he had to exhaust the CAF grievance process before pursuing damages or reinstatement.

• Exhaustion of administrative remedies
• Charter damages
• Jurisdiction
• Abuse of process
• Grievance procedure
• Exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies

Read case analysis

Matusiak v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court allowed judicial review of a VRAB decision denying a disability pension for major depression, holding the Board’s causation analysis was patently unreasonable.

• Standard of review
• Causation and aggravation
• Disability pension entitlement
• Procedural fairness
• Weighing of medical evidence
• Thin skull doctrine

Read case analysis