Canada Case Law

McLean v. McLean

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The application to dismiss is denied because it would be inappropriate at the interlocutory stage to make definitive findings on whether the plaintiffs' OSINT tactics breached privacy or constituted abuse of process where parallel claims exist; interests of justice require resolution on a full evidentiary record at trial to avoid fettering the trial judge and creating inconsistent findings.

Source excerpt

• Online anonymity
• Ip address collection
• Osint investigations
• Abuse of process
• Costs

Read case analysis

A.T. v A.S.

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court exercised discretion to award lump sum costs below the respondent's requested 75% of his billed amounts after deducting specific improper or inapplicable charges (total deductions $5,897.90 leaving an adjusted baseline of $6,668.32) and concluded a $2,500 lump sum (plus a prior $750 award) represents a fair and proportionate contribution reflecting Tariff C guidance, the conduct of both parties, and deficiencies in the respondent's affidavit and billing entries.

Source excerpt

• Costs awards
• Tariff c
• Publication ban
• Evidence admissibility
• Self-represented litigant
• Adjournment

Read case analysis

Further Detention of Things Seized (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted further detention under ss. 490(9.1) and 490(3) until January 21, 2027 because the Seized Items and copied electronic data are objectively reasonably required for an ongoing complex investigation involving digital forensic processing, analyst review for CSAEM, firearms and counterfeit investigations and expert reports; the investigation's complexity and the interests of justice (including protection of a minor complainant and ensuring proper investigation and potential trial evidence) outweigh the Interested Party's property and privacy interests, and a sealing order under s…

Source excerpt

• Further detention of seized property
• Sealing order
• Digital evidence extraction and review
• Complexity of investigation
• Child sexual exploitation offences

Read case analysis

Sirois (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court refused to revoke the inspector and dismissed the applications to examine the trustee and for declaratory/ethical relief because the contested proceedings did not involve the bankrupt estate as required by s.116(2), the proposed trustee examination was a fishing expedition not properly tied to estate administration under s.163(2), and the bankrupt failed to show lack of good faith under s.4.2(2) or misuse under the Code of Ethics; however, the trustee was ordered to make available specified non-privileged categories of documents for review within 21 days with redactions to protect p…

Source excerpt

• Inspector appointment
• Trustee examination
• Inspection of records
• Disclosure and confidentiality
• Discharge from bankruptcy
• Conflict of interest

Read case analysis

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

E.F. v. Correctional Service of Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal granted E.F.’s request to anonymize this human rights proceeding, relying on section 52 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and prior related rulings.

• Gender identity or expression
• Anonymization/confidentiality orders
• Access to health care in custody
• Human-rights
• Privacy
• Anonymization-orders

Read case analysis

Hellboy Productions, Inc. v. Doe #1

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court granted a Norwich order compelling Cogeco to disclose subscriber names and addresses tied to IP addresses used in alleged BitTorrent copyright infringement.

• Norwich order
• Disclosure of subscriber information
• Bittorrent/p2p infringement
• Admissibility of forensic evidence
• Section 34.1 copyright act presumptions
• Norwich-order

Read case analysis

A.B. v. C.D.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the formal chambers application was necessary because previously published reasons existed and the request sought modification of published judgments; affidavit evidence for the stand-alone Rule 10-3 application was admissible (post-trial material need not be struck and hearsay may be used to show statements were made but not for truth); applying the Sherman Estate balancing test the court concluded there is a serious risk to the identified public interest (children's health, privacy and safety) if actual initials remain, and granted further anonymization ordering that all pre…

Source excerpt

• Anonymization
• Open court principle
• Hearsay on chambers applications
• Judicial discretion
• Sealing and publication orders

Read case analysis

Further Detention of Things Seized (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Although police conduct included unexplained delays and administrative failures, the USB data is clearly necessary to the ongoing investigation into a serious firearm shooting and to link co-conspirators; on balance the public interest and investigational need outweigh the respondent's privacy interest such that continued detention is in the interests of justice, but only for a limited, specified period to April 1, 2026.

Source excerpt

• Further detention of seized things
• Section 490(9.1) criminal code
• Electronic data as a 'thing'
• Police delay and conduct
• Complexity of investigation
• Balancing public interest and privacy

Read case analysis

Appellant v Minister of Employment and Social Development

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The Appeal Division allowed the appeal in part because the reliable objective medical evidence (family physician CPP report of March 2, 2023 describing incapacity as of February 2023 and psychologist reports including September 9, 2024) established that the claimant has had a severe and prolonged disability continuously since February 2023; the claimant's minimum qualifying period ended September 30, 2024 given commencement of CPP retirement payments in October 2024; under CPP rules a disability onset of February 2023 makes pension payable from June 2023; absence of objective medical records…

Source excerpt

• Minimum qualifying period
• Onset of disability
• Severe and prolonged disability
• Anonymization/privacy request
• Medical evidence sufficiency

Read case analysis