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
The Yukon Court of Appeal dismissed an extension and leave application, holding the proposed appeal from an interlocutory order had no reasonable prospect of success.
Ontario Court of Appeal decision on cross-count similar fact evidence in a doctor sexual assault case; the majority dismissed the appeal, while one judge would have allowed it in part.
The Federal Court granted judicial review, finding the RAD unreasonably dismissed independent corroborating evidence in a refugee claim and remitted the appeal.
La Cour fédérale radie une DACJ préparée par une personne non avocate, autorise une modification dans les 30 jours et condamne Murat Damas aux dépens.
Application to strike the defendant's Response is dismissed because, assuming the truth of pleaded facts, the Response is not plainly and obviously devoid of reasonable defences; the pleaded contextual facts are capable of supporting defences of fair comment, qualified privilege and responsible communication, and discovery and malice issues are matters for trial or separate process.
Source excerpt
La Cour fédérale radie une DACJ irrégulière préparée par une personne non autorisée à pratiquer le droit, mais permet une modification dans les 30 jours.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed a motion by Joss Covenoho to intervene in the Caruso appeal, finding the request untimely, duplicative, and unsupported.
The Amended Statement of Claim is plain and obviously unsustainable: named committees are not legal entities; section 100 of the Paramedics Act grants statutory immunity that, on the pleaded facts, bars claims against the College Defendants; the Lawyer Defendants owed duties to their client and the ASOC fails to plead material facts necessary to sustain the alleged torts against them; summary judgment is warranted unless plaintiff is permitted to amend and does so by the court deadline.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed a motion for an extension of time to cross-appeal in a Law Society licensing dispute, finding the proposed appeal lacked merit.
The motion for a confidentiality order is denied because the applicant failed to satisfy the Sherman Estate three-step test: there was no evidence that court openness posed a serious risk to an important public interest, no necessity shown that alternative measures would not prevent any risk, and no proportionality analysis supported restricting openness; accordingly the prothonotary's interim confidentiality order is rescinded.
Source excerpt
Explore more
