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 Federal Court partly allowed a Canada Evidence Act section 38 application, authorizing disclosure of 21 documents subject to strict security terms and confirming nondisclosure of 27 others.
Summary judgment granted for defendants on claims of unlawful interference with economic relations/unlawful means, interference with contractual relations, negligent infliction of economic loss, and unjust enrichment because essential elements of those causes of action were absent on the evidence (no act actionable against a third party for unlawful means; no contract between plaintiff and government for interference with contractual relations; no duty/proximity for negligence; no enrichment/juristic reason for unjust enrichment). Claims for misfeasance in public office and conspiracy were no…
Source excerpt
Decision I was reasonable insofar as the Tribunal identified a process defect (evaluators' unexplained assumption) and validly recommended a re-evaluation; Decision II was unreasonable because the Tribunal misinterpreted MR 12, effectively rewrote the RFP by imposing unstated 'functional' bollard pull deductions and additional criteria, failed to defer to the expert evaluators who had reasonably applied industry standards (classification society procedures), and thus exceeded its oversight jurisdiction; remedial result: dismiss Heiltsuk Horizon's applications, grant Atlantic and AG applicatio…
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge's factual findings that the respondents' answers were true, accurate, responsive and met the standard of care are supported by the record and not palpably wrong; Piché's statements to investigators were made on a privileged occasion and malice was not proven to defeat qualified privilege; the duty of good faith was not pleaded; accordingly the trial judgment is affirmed and costs awarded.
Source excerpt
Assuming without deciding that a duty of fairness could arise on reconsideration, the record establishes there was no unfairness: the Sponsors reconsidered the disqualification, obtained external legal advice, considered the appellant's affidavits, and reasonably maintained the disqualification; P1's non-participation did not render the process unfair and the motion judge's dismissal of the action is affirmed.
Source excerpt
On the totality of the evidence the Court concluded beyond reasonable doubt that Bry'n Ross knowingly manipulated the procurement process (frequent contract splitting, non-rotation of vendors, bundling avoidance, sham/matching quotes, sending RFQs to the same location) to channel the vast majority of heating-plant contracts to companies controlled by Harold Dawson; Dawson knowingly used multiple companies and sham quotes, marked up prices in an artificially constrained market and conferred material benefits on DND employee Langille (debit card access, bill payments, loans) without written con…
Source excerpt
The court struck most of a petition challenging a labour-based project labour model, but kept certiorari and prohibition claims alive and added AIRCC as a respondent.
The Yukon Court of Appeal held that a clear RFP waiver clause barred Mega Reporting’s damages claim and allowed Yukon’s appeal.
Measured objectively at the time of submission C.F.'s bid complied with the tender documents and created Contract A; the Town's disqualification based on post-bid communications and a misinterpretation of those communications breached the Town's duty to treat bidders fairly and equally; C.F. therefore is entitled to lost profits on the original contract and the associated change order.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal reasonably interpreted the RFP as prescribing a sequential three‑phase evaluation in which conformance and workmanship under Annex B were to be assessed prior to user trials; PWGSC unreasonably applied an undisclosed post‑trial durability criterion and impermissibly treated the respondent's post‑submission communications as bid amendments, so Royer (having the highest user score) should have been recommended for award; the application to set aside the Tribunal decision is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
