Esheria Canada Case Law
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
6 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Canada case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative law 2020 NSSC 370

Bancroft v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Lands and Forestry)

Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The applicants failed to rebut the presumption of regularity and did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances to admit or order production of additional materials; redactions in the Memorandum to Executive Council and related documents attract public interest immunity and properly remain withheld; therefore the motion to expand the record is dismissed and costs awarded as ordered.

Source excerpt

  • Record on judicial review
  • Public interest immunity (cabinet confidentiality)
  • Presumption of regularity
  • Procedural fairness
  • Admissibility of extrinsic evidence
  • Duty to consult
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2018 FC 319

Canada (Attorney General) v. Chad

Court
Federal Court

The Federal Court held that a vague public-interest certificate was not enough on its own in a s. 37 CEA objection and denied cross-examination of the certificate author.

  • Section 37 canada evidence act
  • Public interest privilege
  • Disclosure and certified tribunal record
  • In camera/ex parte procedure
  • Cross-examination of certificate author
  • Apparent case for disclosure
Read case analysis
Criminal law 2011 BCSC 1739

R. v. Belcourt

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court ordered disclosure of contact information and limited demographic personal information, subject to safety exceptions and confidentiality undertakings for defence counsel.

  • Disclosure obligations
  • Stinchcombe doctrine
  • Third-party personal information
  • Undertakings and confidentiality
  • Informant privilege
  • Redaction protocols
Read case analysis
Criminal law 2011 NSSC 283

R. v. Carvery

Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Crown's disclosure (including an approximate straight-line distance of about 120–130 feet, that the post was elevated, that officers did not move, use of binoculars, sketches narrowing possible angles, lighting descriptions and areas not observable) was sufficient to allow the accused to make full answer and defence; therefore observation post privilege is upheld and the defence motion for further specific disclosure is denied, subject to possible renewal at trial and consideration of any cross-examination limitations when assessing witness reliability.

Source excerpt

  • Observation post privilege
  • Right to full answer and defence
  • Disclosure orders
  • Cross-examination limitations
Read case analysis
Civil procedure 2009 BCCA 278

Wong v. Antunes

Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal over disclosure of police/Crown materials in a civil action parallel to a criminal prosecution, directing a screening desk-order process.

  • Police/crown disclosure (stinchcombe)
  • Implied undertaking
  • Public interest immunity
  • Desk order for police files
  • Screening mechanism for crown briefs
  • Civil-procedure
Read case analysis
Evidence 2008 FC 560

Canada (Attorney General) v. Khawaja

Court
Federal Court

The Federal Court confirmed the Attorney General’s non-disclosure decision under s. 38.04 of the Canada Evidence Act, finding the redacted information not relevant.

  • Disclosure
  • Relevance (stinchcombe)
  • Section 38 canada evidence act
  • Redaction
  • Amicus curiae
  • Third party information
Read case analysis
National security 2007 FCA 342

Canada (Attorney General) v. Khawaja

Court
Federal Court of Appeal

The Court held the designated judge correctly applied the s.38 balancing framework and was not required to permit a second round of ex parte submissions once he had exercised his s.38.06 discretion; however inadvertent disclosure in the descriptive Schedule A required correction, so the appeal was allowed in part by substituting a new Schedule A under the same terms and conditions; the respondent’s cross-appeal was dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Section 38 canada evidence act
  • Disclosure
  • Relevance
  • Standard of review
  • Right to full answer and defence
  • Public interest balancing
Read case analysis
Criminal law 2006 BCSC 392

R. v. Pickton

Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court approved a sealed, in-camera procedure for assessing a s. 37 Canada Evidence Act privilege claim over RCMP materials, applying the Meuckon/Stinchcombe framework.

  • Canada evidence act s.37
  • Public interest privilege
  • Police investigative technique privilege
  • Disclosure obligations (stinchcombe)
  • In-camera review procedure
  • Canada-evidence-act-s-37
Read case analysis
Evidence law 2005 FC 1397

Dominion Investments (Nassau) Ltd. v. Canada

Court
Federal Court

The Federal Court allowed the appeal and set aside a stay of proceedings, holding that section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act could not be used proactively to shield a voluntarily filed affidavit.

  • Section 37 canada evidence act
  • Stay of proceedings under s.50 federal courts act
  • R.j.r. - macdonald test
  • In camera and ex parte hearings
  • Disclosure and redaction
  • Evidence-law
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.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.