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
La Cour a rejeté la demande de procédure sommaire, jugeant le dossier trop complexe et incomplet pour trancher la violation alléguée et le sort du dépôt.
The Court dismissed the judicial review, holding the Surface Rights Board reasonably treated the disputed fuel gas and water pipeline segments as “flow lines” within its jurisdiction.
The court held that a bare assignment of surface-lease rents can create an interest in land if the parties intended it to run with the land. The appeal was dismissed.
The court dismissed Bonavista’s judicial review as premature, holding that available tribunal remedies had not been exhausted and jurisdictional arguments were not clearly raised below.
The Court held that an assignment of rents can create a registerable interest in land if the parties intended that result, so the Bodes remained entitled to the rental payments.
The court upheld most royalty reassessments against ISH Energy, finding a reasonableness standard applied, but remitted some periods as time-barred under the Regulation.
The court held that the petitioners had public interest standing, applied reasonableness review, and found s. 8 of the Water Act allows recurrent short-term water approvals.
The motions judge erred in the form of relief granted: the Federal Court of Appeal allowed the Crown's appeal in part, set aside the order that dismissed the summary judgment motion with an open leave to reapply, and substituted an order adjourning the motion with a direction that the parties submit further and better evidence; the Court confirmed (per Samson) that the Crown is trustee of leases and royalties and has an obligation to collect, but found triable issues (notably discoverability and reasons for Crown inaction) requiring further evidentiary foundation before summary disposition.
Source excerpt
Motion for summary judgment dismissed because neither side put its 'best foot forward' with adequate firsthand evidence; material factual and quantum questions remain and defendants' documentary production was incomplete; issue is appropriate for summary disposition only on further and better evidence, so dismissal with leave to reapply was ordered.
Source excerpt
The Court held that the statutory Indian moneys regime governed the Crown’s handling of the funds, and dismissed Ermineskin’s claims for breach of trust, unjust enrichment, and Charter relief.
Explore more
