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 court dismissed Donna Molby’s summary trial application in a constructive dismissal case, finding the key issues were too fact-intensive and credibility-driven for Rule 9-7.
The court held that a written consent resolution under the BC Business Corporations Act validly removed five Rogers directors and appointed five replacements.
The court dismissed a wrongful dismissal claim after finding an investment adviser forged a client’s signature and transferred accounts without consent, justifying summary dismissal.
The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the portion of the order decertifying the action because the motions judge erred in principle by (1) purporting to make admissions "enure to the benefit" of class members after decertification (admissions cannot bind or benefit a class that no longer exists) and (2) treating the defendant's admissions as a basis for finding the class action was no longer the preferable procedure; the proper course was to enter judgment on admitted common issues and retain the class regime and its statutory mechanisms for resolving individual issues.
Source excerpt
Leave to appeal was granted but the appeal was dismissed. The motions judge did not err: CPR 18 must be read as a whole; 18.12(3) applied because the proceeding was ongoing and requires both that a subpoena cannot be enforced against the non-party and that the proceeding cannot be determined justly without the discovery; appellants failed to satisfy these criteria (a subpoena would be enforceable and party disclosure and discovery could reveal whether non-party evidence was necessary); non-party discovery was therefore premature and discretionary refusal did not produce patent injustice; the…
Source excerpt
The court held that AER’s directors had a disclosable interest in the Black Sea Transaction, which was not fair and reasonable and was oppressive to Jaguar.
Court found investigative delay up to mid-2008 was unreasonable but did not amount to a breach of s.7 or abuse of process; Crown did not jointly investigate with NSSC such that NSSC file was first-party disclosure; McNeil and O'Connor regimes can coexist and defendants bore responsibility for significant post-charge delay by resisting timely O'Connor applications and pursuing interlocutory tactics; Crown bore some delay for conflict and Rowbotham litigation. On balance post-charge delay did not breach s.11(b) and no stay was warranted; all delay and abuse applications were dismissed.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because the Court found Cablotel was a tax‑shelter arrangement that did not carry on a genuine business for s.37 purposes and, alternatively, the appellant was a limited partner under ss.96(2.4)/96(2.2) and a passive specified member under s.248(1); accordingly he was not entitled to deduct R&D losses or claim ITCs. The Court declined to impose the s.179.1 penalty or award costs for abuse of process.
Source excerpt
The court found the trustee wrongfully released control documents without required approvals, but held the plaintiffs acquiesced and dismissed the action and counterclaim.
Explore more
