Canada Case Law

Milburn v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court granted public interest standing because the amended PHIA and Regulations raise a serious justiciable Charter privacy issue, the applicants demonstrated a genuine personal and organizational interest linked to the claim, and proceeding by these applicants is a reasonable and effective means to obtain judicial review; admissible affidavit material established capacity and commitment to prosecute and outweighed the respondent's assertions of hopelessness of the claim.

Source excerpt

• Public interest standing
• Charter ss.7 and 8
• Electronic health records
• Personal health information act
• Regulatory compliance
• Summary judgment on standing

Read case analysis

Lamarche v. British Columbia (Securities Commission)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal stayed constitutional and Privacy Act claims arising from a Securities Commission investigation, but set aside the strike of the Privacy Act claim.

• Solicitor-client privilege
• Charter ss.7 and 8
• Section 144 securities act
• Exhaustion of administrative remedies
• Stay and striking of pleadings
• Privacy act damages

Read case analysis

Federation of Law Societies of Canada v. Attorney General of Canada

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted an interlocutory injunction exempting legal professionals from new ITA reporting rules pending a constitutional challenge.

• Charter ss.7 and 8
• Mandatory disclosure
• Solicitor-client privilege
• Interlocutory injunction
• Reporting obligations
• Interlocutory-injunction

Read case analysis

Félix v. The King

Court

Tax Court of Canada

The Court struck out specified portions of the Notice of Appeal as disclosing no reasonable grounds because (1) the Tax Court lacks jurisdiction to order reduction of interest assessed under s.220(3.1) (that discretion lies with the Minister/Federal Court), and (2) evidence obtained under ss.231.1 and 231.2 may be used for administrative reassessment where the purpose is determination of tax liability and judicial authorization under ss.231.2(2)-(3) is required only for unnamed-person requests; defects were incurable so no leave to amend was granted.

Source excerpt

• Motion to strike
• Striking out pleadings
• Charter ss.7 and 8
• Income tax act ss.231.1 and 231.2
• Interest reduction jurisdiction (s.220(3.1))

Read case analysis

U.S.A. v. Sari

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Disclosure application in an extradition case. The court ordered limited production of Canadian-held documents, while refusing settlement agreements and other requested materials.

• Disclosure
• Abuse of process
• Dual criminality
• Committal
• Larosa air of reality test
• Charter ss.7 and 8

Read case analysis

Brooks v. Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The pleadings alleging unlawful conduct by the auditor were plain and obvious failures because they contained only bare assertions and no sufficient material facts to support that the auditor acted for a predominantly penal purpose or as an agent of the enforcement branch; those parts of the notices of appeal have no reasonable chance of success and were properly struck, but the appellant may be permitted to argue that loss or destruction of T1 returns can shift the onus of proof.

Source excerpt

• Reassessments
• Motion to strike
• Pleading standards
• Charter ss.7 and 8
• Onus of proof
• Misconduct by revenue officials

Read case analysis

R. v. Campbell

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge’s reasons were sufficient to support the finding that the officer asked the nurse for the urine ethanol results and that those results were obtained in breach of s.8; although the judge erred in finding nurses were state agents when blood was taken, an appellate s.24(2) analysis conducted afresh establishes that the police conduct (intentionally obtaining confidential medical information and using it to obtain warrants) was sufficiently serious and caused significant informational privacy harm to require exclusion of the evidence; exclusion rendered the Crown’s case non-viable…

Source excerpt

• Charter ss.7 and 8
• S.24(2) exclusion
• Search warrants
• Medical confidentiality
• Evidence admissibility
• State agent doctrine

Read case analysis

R. v. Grandison

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court upheld general, search, tracking, number recorder, and production orders, declined to excise challenged material, and admitted the cocaine evidence.

• General warrant
• Search warrant (cdsa)
• Tracking warrant
• Number recorder warrant
• Production order
• Vehicle tracking

Read case analysis

R. v. Keiros-Meyer

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Habeas corpus challenge to an involuntary prison transfer was dismissed as moot after the inmate was returned to minimum security; the court declined to decide the merits.

• Habeas corpus
• Prisoner transfer
• Procedural fairness
• Mootness doctrine and discretion
• Disclosure under s.27 ccra
• Security classification

Read case analysis

Mulgrew v. The Law Society of British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court upheld the Law Society’s second production order, held s. 26(4) applies to third parties, and found no Charter breach. The first order was moot.

• Statutory interpretation
• Production orders
• Search and seizure
• Solicitor-client privilege
• Judicial review
• Charter ss.7 and 8

Read case analysis