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
Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an IRCC refusal of a permanent residence application as incomplete, finding the officer reasonably relied on the application record.
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a PRRA refusal, finding no proved solicitor-client relationship and no clear evidence of ineffective assistance.
The appeal is dismissed because the Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding errors in the summary trial judge's factual findings that the solicitor obtained instructions to settle, that the client understood and consented to the mutual release, and that the solicitor's advice and conduct met the standard of a reasonably competent lawyer; therefore there was no basis to find solicitor's negligence.
Source excerpt
The court has jurisdiction under Rule 12-1(9) to give precedence to the professional negligence trial; because the LPA review and the professional negligence action overlap materially and create a real risk of inconsistent findings and multiplicity of proceedings, the appropriate remedy is to stay the LPA review pending determination of the professional negligence action, subject to conditions (delivery of affidavit(s) of justification).
Source excerpt
Court found ICBC, Wright and Epstein breached duties to Lau (ICBC and Wright breached duty of utmost good faith and failed to investigate; Epstein breached retainer by failing to advise and act regarding the November 17, 2015 offer). However claims against ICBC and Wright are statute-barred by the Limitation Act as discovered by August 31, 2017. Causation for full avoidance of loss was not proven on balance of probabilities, but the court found defendants' breaches caused a lost chance to avoid or reduce loss and awarded loss-of-chance damages of 15% of Lau's shortfall against Epstein alone (…
Source excerpt
The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an estate trustee’s appeal from summary judgment, holding the respondent lawyer owed no duty or fiduciary duty and the claim was time-barred.
Defendants owed a duty of care to their client sellers (the McNallys) but not to the non-client buyers (the Kirbys) because no proximate relationship was established; the applicable standard of care in October 2020–March 2021 permitted seller identity verification up to completion consistent with FINTRAC/CREA practices then in force, the particular email impersonation fraud was not a known industry risk at the time, the defendants met the standard, causation was not established on the plaintiffs' case, negligent misrepresentation failed for lack of a special relationship and actionable false…
Source excerpt
The Court upheld the trial judge: the Contracts, read objectively with surrounding circumstances, did not evidence an intention to create a trust or impose a fiduciary obligation over the deposits and therefore no trust existed; further, no proximate relationship was established between the lawyer and the appellants to give rise to a duty of care in negligence, so the negligence claim failed; consequently the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Court found defendants liable for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty: the Amended SOC contained a factual error (B Claims misdescribed as held in trust for Boss) caused by defendant counsel's failure to verify and to account for prior file materials; that error foreseeably gave the beneficial owner leverage, caused settlement complications and payments; causation established; but plaintiffs bore 50% contributory negligence for failures to detect and mitigate; court applied a $2,000,000 'but for' deduction (likely value that would have been paid for B Claims absent the error), reduced rec…
Source excerpt
A prima facie inability to pay was established by the pleadings and supporting evidence (bank balances, significant recent legal fees, management fees, large intercorporate debt and unclear recovery of receivables); balancing the risk of a dry judgment against any stifling of the plaintiffs' claim, the court exercised its discretion under s.236 BCA to order security for costs in the reduced amount of $60,000 to be posted by May 3, 2026 and held interest-bearing in plaintiffs' counsel trust account, stayed the action pending compliance, and declined to order a personal undertaking by the major…
Source excerpt
Explore more
