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
Summary trial judgment for the plaintiff in a renovation dispute. The court found breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation, awarded compensatory damages, punitive damages, interest and costs.
The Court upheld the motion judge: the employee’s duties had fundamentally expanded such that the substratum of the 2005 contract disappeared and its termination limits were unenforceable; the ICA did not unambiguously oust the common law entitlement to earn bonus during the reasonable notice period; the three-year averaging method for quantifying lost bonus was reasonable and entitled to deference; the trial judge erred in deducting the full pro-rated bonus paid on termination and should have only deducted the overpayment portion, resulting in an upward adjustment of damages and an award of…
Source excerpt
Seagull failed to verify precise ceiling measurements before ordering 96-inch wall-to-ceiling cabinets and therefore is responsible for the additional cost to have Winmar modify the cabinets ($4,256). However, most deficiencies were remediable and there was insufficient evidence to justify full replacement; taking account of loss of cooperation and economic waste, the court awarded a global counterclaim amount of $12,000 and allowed the claimant's $18,805 claim, offsetting the amounts to a net payment of $6,805 by the Defendants. No costs or interest were awarded.
Source excerpt
The court held that the parties' longstanding representative agency relationship entitled Churchill to reasonable notice and that six months' notice (as provided in the written agreement) was reasonable; the non-solicitation clause in Haider's employment contract was void as unreasonably broad and contrary to public policy; accordingly Churchill was entitled to damages for Wineries' wrongful termination equal to six months' commissions reduced to reflect costs, resulting in an award of $152,187.53 against the corporate Defendants; issues of costs and prejudgment interest to be addressed if no…
Source excerpt
The appeal was allowed only on mitigation: the trial judge erred in requiring the employer to prove more than was necessary to establish that a VP E-Commerce offer seven months post-termination was comparable; rejection of that reasonably comparable offer and the plaintiff's mitigation delay justified reducing damages in lieu of notice to six months' compensation. All other findings — that the plaintiff was constructively dismissed, that she was functioning as COO for notice purposes, and that aggravated ($50,000) and punitive ($25,000) damages were warranted — were upheld as supported by the…
Source excerpt
The November 10 email was a request for additional time and did not constitute 'notice to the contrary' terminating the financing condition; subsequent communications and conduct by the parties waived the financing deadline; the defendant's declaration that the agreement was terminated amounted to a unilateral termination and breach; claimants are entitled to damages for out‑of‑pocket living expenses and the lost increase in property value, mitigated to amounts awarded by the court.
Source excerpt
The court held the defendant validly cancelled a home construction contract after financing failed, rejected the plaintiff’s loss-of-profits claim, and dismissed the good-faith claim.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed a cross-appeal about whether resale commission should be included in damages for breach of a real estate purchase contract.
Adjudicator found limited proven contractor breach confined primarily to defective concrete work warranting a measured special damages allowance; the majority of the claimant's asserted defects and future-cost claims were unproven or inadequately evidenced, or mitigated by the claimant's conduct and refusal to permit rectification; defendant established an outstanding contract balance which, after allowed credits to claimant, resulted in a net set-off so that claimant must pay defendant $8,455.03. Court retained jurisdiction to decide interest and costs.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed Globalnet’s appeal and held that related-party transfer of the property did not bar recovery of reasonable remediation costs from the negligent builder and designer.
Explore more
