Canada Case Law

R. v. Ali

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The application to vary the prior leave order is dismissed because the original decision appropriately accounted for the record's size and complexity, nothing material has changed, the revised factum remains unfocussed and inefficient, and permitting its length would frustrate the purposes of a factum and hamper the court and the respondent.

Source excerpt

• Factum length and page limits
• Leave to file extended factum
• Reconsideration of court order
• Use of chronology in factum
• Fairness versus efficiency in appellate briefing

Read case analysis

R. v. Ali

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Given the exceptional volume and complexity of the record and the number of issues to be argued, but mindful that factums must remain concise and the extension must be proportionate, the court exercised its case management discretion to permit a measured extension and granted leave to file a factum not exceeding 90 pages, with specific filing deadlines and reciprocal limits for the respondent and reply factum.

Source excerpt

• Leave to file extended factum
• Case management
• Page limits for factums
• Restrictions on publication
• Appeal from conviction

Read case analysis

B.A. v. J.F.

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

Motion dismissed because this Court lacks statutory authority under s.65.1 to stay the orders of other judges that simply dismissed the appeal, and alternatively the applicant failed the RJR‑MacDonald stay test: the appeal lacked a serious prospect of success (adopting Justice Derrick's detailed reasons), the applicant did not demonstrate irreparable harm (no enforcement steps shown and assertions unsupported), and therefore the balance of convenience did not favor a stay.

Source excerpt

• Stay of execution
• Leave to appeal to supreme court of canada
• Dismissal for failure to perfect appeal
• Rjr‑macdonald stay test (serious issue, irreparable harm, balance of convenience)
• Ineffective assistance of counsel (allegation)
• Damages and costs

Read case analysis

R. v. Graham

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court acquitted Donovan Kayle Graham of sexual assault, finding the complainant’s evidence sincere but not sufficiently reliable to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

• Sexual assault
• Consent
• Credibility and reliability of witnesses
• Reasonable doubt
• Youth witness evidence
• S.486.5 publication ban

Read case analysis

R. v. Teixeira

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal clarified its disclosure order in this criminal appeal, adding limiting terms on use and disclosure of sensitive information to protect witnesses.

• Section 37 canada evidence act
• Disclosure orders
• Limiting terms on disclosure
• Use restrictions on sensitive information
• Publication bans under criminal code
• Right to full answer and defence

Read case analysis

R. v. Reimer

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The court granted a partial stay of its publication ban decision and ordered a temporarily redacted version of the substantive judgment to be published with paragraphs 66-68 redacted, and ordered the Crown's motion record sealed and replaced with a redacted version. The court concluded the Crown raised serious arguable issues for Supreme Court consideration, established irreparable harm from publication of verbatim sexualized text messages, and that the balance of convenience and public interest favoured limited redaction while preserving the decision's precedential value.

Source excerpt

• Section 276 evidence (rape-shield)
• Discretionary publication ban (t.w.w.)
• Sherman estate test
• Stay pending leave to appeal
• Redaction and sealing orders
• Scope of court's inherent and statutory powers

Read case analysis

R. v. R.S.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to establish the factual, performance and prejudice components of ineffective assistance of counsel and the trial judge reasonably found the inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence to be peripheral in light of corroborating evidence from multiple child complainants; convictions and sentence are therefore upheld.

Source excerpt

• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Credibility assessment
• Child complainants
• Publication ban (s.486.4)
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

R. v. S.P.P.

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Because the extrinsic record concerned the same complainant and accused within the charged timeframe, was authored by the same investigating officer, and directly bore on the complainant’s credibility — a central issue — it constituted an exception to the collateral fact rule; on balancing the s.278.92(3) factors the record has significant probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice to the administration of justice and therefore is admissible under s.278.92(2).

Source excerpt

• Admissibility of records
• Collateral fact rule
• Complainant credibility
• Section 278.92 criminal code
• Publication ban ss.486.4-486.5

Read case analysis

9219-1568 Quebec Inc. v. Canada (Privacy Commissioner)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because the Federal Court correctly applied the legal tests and reasonably concluded that the appellants failed to prove irreparable harm with evidence of sufficient quality to justify an injunction; there was no palpable and overriding error in the Federal Court’s factual assessment and the public interest in the Commissioner’s mandate and court openness weighed against relief.

Source excerpt

• Personal information protection and electronic documents act
• Irreparable harm
• Balance of convenience
• Standard of review (palpable and overriding error)
• Confidentiality orders and redactions
• Costs

Read case analysis

R. v. Lam

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The governing statutory provision, s.539 of the Criminal Code, authorizes non-publication orders in the preliminary inquiry context and the challenged order fell within that statutory scheme; therefore the certiorari application was properly dismissed and the non-publication regime continues pending trial.

Source excerpt

• Section 539 criminal code
• Non-publication order
• Preliminary inquiry evidence
• Certiorari
• Statutory publication restrictions

Read case analysis