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
2 court collections
Last checked

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative law 2026 FC 454

Lemay v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a CERB remission denial, holding the CRA had to apply the CESB statute despite a misleading form, and awarded costs to the applicant.

  • Eligibility for benefits
  • Remission order
  • Representations by government officials
  • Legislative supremacy
  • Reasonableness review
  • Judicial-review
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2026 FC 277

Piscitelli v. Canada (Attorney General)

Federal Court judicial review of a CRA CERB ineligibility decision was allowed in part because the reasoning for Period 2 was unintelligible and unreasonable.

  • Canada emergency response benefit (cerb)
  • Eligibility criteria
  • Procedural fairness
  • Standard of review - reasonableness (vavilov)
  • Remedy - remittance
  • Cerb
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2025 FC 1469

Whitten v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court dismissed Ms. Whitten’s judicial review of CRA decisions denying CERB and CRB eligibility, finding the $5,000 income assessment reasonable.

  • Cerb
  • Crb
  • Eligibility
  • Reasonableness review
  • Remission order
  • Self-employment income interpretation
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2025 FC 594

Fard v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a CRA decision denying CRCB eligibility, finding the Officer acted reasonably and fairly under the statute.

  • Canada recovery benefits act
  • Eligibility criteria
  • Procedural fairness
  • Standard of review — reasonableness
  • Judicial-review
  • Procedural-fairness
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2025 FC 583

Mailloux v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court dismissed Mr. Mailloux’s judicial review of CRA decisions denying CERB and CRB, finding the eligibility determinations reasonable.

  • Cerb
  • Crb
  • Judicial review
  • Reasonableness standard
  • Eligibility criteria
  • Admissibility of new evidence
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2025 FC 197

Severcan v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of CRA’s CERB eligibility decision, finding the review process fair and the ineligibility finding reasonable.

  • Eligibility for emergency benefits
  • Procedural fairness
  • Standard of review
  • Reasonableness review
  • Cerb-eligibility
  • Judicial-review
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2024 FC 1916

Tremblay v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a CRB eligibility decision, holding the assessment turned on average weekly income, not biweekly pay.

  • Reasonableness standard of review
  • Canada recovery benefit eligibility
  • Statutory interpretation of income thresholds
  • Evidence and review procedure
  • Judicial-review
  • Reasonableness-standard
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2024 FC 1562

Komleva v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Federal Court allowed a judicial review of a CRB eligibility denial, finding procedural unfairness and unreasonableness, and sent the matter back for redetermination.

  • Procedural fairness
  • Reasonableness review
  • Canada recovery benefit eligibility
  • Remittal
  • Procedural-fairness
  • Reasonableness-review
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2022 FC 1247

Davis v. Canada (Attorney General)

Judicial review of a CRB eligibility decision was dismissed because the CRBA required net self-employment income, not gross revenue, and the process was fair.

  • Canada recovery benefit
  • Legitimate expectation
  • Procedural fairness
  • Eligibility criteria
  • Contract law
  • Judicial-review
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2019 SST 48

M. J. v. Minister of Employment and Social Development

The appeal is allowed because the General Division breached natural justice by unduly restricting cross-examination, based its decision on an erroneous factual finding that the separation was involuntary without regard to undisputed evidence of deliberate financial and legal separation, and failed to consider the deceased's diminished capacity and the role of his attorney when assessing his intentions; on the proper application of the common-law relationship factors the evidence establishes that P. S. was not in a conjugal relationship with the deceased at death, and therefore the survivor be…

  • Natural justice
  • Cross-examination scope
  • Error of law
  • Erroneous finding of fact
  • Common-law partner determination
  • Mental capacity and power of attorney
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.