Canada Case Law

Hoyle v. Scouts Canada

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Court held that disclosure should be ordered in a tiered, protective manner: source documents and the confidential list must be produced with the complainant's name and address/contact information redacted, but dates and particulars of the complaint are to be unredacted; the Wigmore test was not fully satisfied on the evidence and privacy interests are balanced by targeted redactions; order without prejudice to further disclosure applications on additional evidence.

Source excerpt

• Wigmore test
• Class privilege
• Discovery and disclosure
• Redaction
• Open court principle
• Similar fact evidence

Read case analysis

Canadian Hockey League v. McEwan

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because the case management judge did not err in exercising her discretion: the proposed cross‑examinations would chiefly affect credibility and weight reserved for trial, would not materially assist determination of certification requirements including commonality and "some basis in fact," and concerns about delay were legitimate given the litigation history; her refusal is entitled to deference and is affirmed.

Source excerpt

• Certification
• Cross-examination of affidavits
• Common issues
• Preferable procedure
• Expert evidence
• Gatekeeping

Read case analysis

Salas v. Aya

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The appeal is dismissed because the Adjudicator's factual findings were supported by the evidentiary record and there was no error of law or breach of natural justice; the appellants merely sought a re‑weighing of evidence, which is not available on appeal under s.32(1) of the Small Claims Court Act, and therefore the Adjudicator's award in favour of the tenants ($1,337.42) and costs ($50) is affirmed.

Source excerpt

• Security deposit
• Misappropriation of goods
• Wear and tear vs. tenant damage
• Cleaning charges
• Pest control liability
• Insurance deductible recovery

Read case analysis

Zeynelli v. Bell Canada

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that Bell breached any contractual or tortious duty or that Bell's conduct caused the plaintiff's alleged credit score decline and consequent business losses; evidence was speculative or inadmissible and Bell did not report missed payments April–June 2024; defendant succeeds on its counterclaim for unpaid cancellation fees of $760.66 plus statutory interest.

Source excerpt

• Summary trial suitability
• Summary judgment alternative
• Duty of care
• Causation
• Limitation of liability clause
• Admissibility of expert evidence

Read case analysis

Choi v. Slopinski

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal granted a no fee order and a partial stay of enforcement of costs, but allowed the Registrar’s costs assessment to proceed.

• Strike pleadings under rule 9-5
• Leave to amend
• No fee order (r.85)
• Stay of enforcement of costs
• Assessment of costs before registrar
• Amenability to judicial review

Read case analysis

Woodske v. Metzner

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck a self-represented plaintiff’s claim against opposing family-law counsel, finding no duty of care, absolute privilege, and no reasonable prospect of success.

• Strike pleadings
• Duty of care of opposing counsel
• Absolute privilege
• Abuse of process
• Costs
• Strike-pleadings

Read case analysis

PCL Constructors Canada Inc. v. Town of Truro

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Court held PCL entitled in part to additional Contractor's Fees calculated under the Contract/Proposal (10% mark-up and 5% fee applied to construction costs exceeding the base budget), entitlement to certain staff-cost reimbursements except for the period February 1, 2013–May 8, 2013 (not approved extension), recovery of an unpaid certified progress cheque ($120,096.63) and contractual interest; Owners' requests for full remediation of the precast stairs were denied as disproportionate and unnecessary and instead awarded nominal damages limited to installing handrails and signage; certain sub…

Source excerpt

• Change orders
• Construction management fee
• Delays
• Pre-judgment interest
• Remediation damages
• Nominal damages

Read case analysis

Atkinson v. Wickens

Court

Nova Scotia Small Claims Court

The seller's inaccurate representation that a septic system existed constituted a non-fraudulent but actionable misrepresentation; the buyer reasonably relied on that representation and is entitled to damages covering the cost to locate and install a functional septic system plus search costs and general damages. The realtor and brokerage were not liable because they reasonably relied on the seller's representations and had contractual protections.

Source excerpt

• Misrepresentation
• Septic system
• Caveat emptor
• Indemnity
• Contribution
• Damages

Read case analysis

Rabinowitz v. The Owners, Strata Plan BCS 183

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Application to add CMI Concierge & Security Inc. as a defendant after limitation expiry was dismissed because the plaintiff did not rebut prejudice and the proposed amendments were insufficient.

• Adding parties
• Prejudice from delay
• Cause of action on pleadings
• Adjournment of trial
• Duty of care
• Rule 6-2(7)

Read case analysis

Farid v. Brunt

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Divisional Court, under s.19(1.2)(d) of the Courts of Justice Act, has jurisdiction to hear an appeal dismissing a claim for more than $50,000 where the trial judge's reasons indicate an award if successful would not exceed $50,000; the Court of Appeal should not constitute itself as a Divisional Court panel absent compelling reasons, and on these facts the appeal must be quashed and directed to the Divisional Court.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Divisional court vs court of appeal
• Statutory interpretation of s.19(1.2)(d) courts of justice act
• Constitution of court as panel of divisional court
• Quash appeal

Read case analysis