Canada Case Law

R. v. Allen-Simec

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Applications dismissed. The accused failed to show a reasonable possibility that non‑production by US authorities prejudiced his ability to make full answer and defence; disclosure to date was substantial and the alleged missing material was speculative. Hearsay reliance on US law‑enforcement information in the ITOs was permissible where the RCMP used that material as a lead, corroborated it through independent Canadian investigative steps, and presented credibly based information; on the face of the ITOs an issuing judge could have been satisfied the statutory thresholds were met. No Charter…

Source excerpt

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.8
• Charter s.11(d)
• Charter s.24(1)
• Charter s.24(2)
• Stinchcombe disclosure

Read case analysis

Imani v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The NOCC fails to plead essential material facts and legal elements for the asserted causes of action, rests on speculative future harm rather than present injury, and the record (including the transcript and reports) does not substantiate the alleged falsehoods; alternative administrative remedies exist; therefore the claim discloses no reasonable cause of action and cannot succeed and must be struck under Rule 9-5(1)(a) and (b) without leave to amend.

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Misfeasance in public office
• Defamation
• Charter s.7
• Charter s.15
• Pleadings and rule 9-5 striking

Read case analysis

Lover-Peace v. Erickson

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held the NOCC, while containing prolix, evidentiary and irrelevant material, nonetheless discloses reasonable causes of action and was wrongly struck in its entirety; the correct remedy was to strike specified irrelevant and evidentiary portions under R.9-5(1)(b), set aside the abuse of process finding under R.9-5(1)(d), and remit the matter to the Supreme Court with directions to file an amended NOCC within 30 days.

Source excerpt

• Striking pleadings
• Abuse of process
• Leave to amend
• Negligence
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Charter s.7

Read case analysis

R. v. Cadieux

Court

Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada

The Court Martial Appeal Court granted Simon Cadieux’s motion to extend time and file a late notice of appeal, finding the prior abandonment was overcome by later legal developments.

• Sex offender registry
• Charter s.7
• Abandonment of appeal
• Extension of time
• Resurrection of abandoned proceeding
• Extension-of-time

Read case analysis

R. v. Roy

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal from robbery-related convictions, upholding the trial judge’s refusal to stay the proceeding and a six-month sentence reduction remedy.

• Excessive force
• Charter s.7
• Remedies under s.24(1)
• Credibility findings
• Appellate review
• Criminal-appeal

Read case analysis

Heegsma v. Hamilton (City)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Ontario Court of Appeal motion decision granting leave to intervene to several groups in a Charter appeal about park evictions, and dismissing others.

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.15
• Intervener leave
• Municipal by-law on encampments
• Charter damages
• Homelessness/encampments

Read case analysis

Canada (Attorney General) v. B.W.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court did not err in certifying the class: the Further Amended Statement of Claim pleaded sufficient material facts to disclose reasonable causes of action in systemic negligence and Charter ss.7 and 15(1); there was some basis in fact for an objectively defined class and class period; the proposed common questions were capable of meaningfully advancing class members' claims; and a class proceeding was preferable given access to justice and judicial economy considerations. The motion judge's reliance on precedents and parts of other decisions was justified and did not amount to re…

Source excerpt

• Certification criteria
• Systemic negligence
• Charter s.7
• Charter s.15
• Identifiable class
• Common issues

Read case analysis

Richard v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Canada’s appeal and upheld certification of a class action over immigration detainees held in provincial prisons.

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.9
• Charter s.12
• Charter s.15
• Negligence - duty of care
• Certification - common issues

Read case analysis

Canadian Constitution Foundation v. Minister of Natural Resources (Nova Scotia)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The motion for public interest standing was granted because the challenge raised a serious justiciable issue, CCF demonstrated a genuine interest and was not a busybody despite being Ontario‑headquartered, and CCF has the capacity, expertise and does not pose a prejudicial duplication of judicial resources such that its suit is a reasonable and effective means of bringing the issues before the court; the existence of a parallel individual judicial review did not render CCF’s participation unnecessary or prejudicial.

Source excerpt

• Public interest standing
• Judicial review
• Charter s.7
• Vires
• Vagueness
• Overbreadth

Read case analysis

United States of America v. Federuik

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal addressed jurisdiction, abuse of process, and vagueness in extradition proceedings, ultimately allowing the appeal by majority and setting aside the invalidity declaration.

• Vagueness doctrine
• S.14(2)(a) extradition act
• Dual proceedings
• Interlocutory appeals
• Extension of time
• Charter s.7

Read case analysis