Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tax Court dismissed an appeal for an eligible dependant amount, holding the appellant remained legally required to pay child support under an unvaried consent order.
The court exercised its discretion under s.245(2) BCA to refuse a mandatory referral to arbitration because arbitration cannot be compelled over an opposing party and the petitioners did not show arbitration would be more efficient; the petitioners failed to show a real risk of dissipation or inability to pay beyond a mere suspicion given the substantial funds already held in trust pursuant to the consent order and supporting Evans valuation, so injunctive relief and orders for additional funds were refused; however, equitable considerations permitted immediate partial release (50%) of the fu…
Source excerpt
The court found contempt proven because the claimant knowingly sold the Nice Property in breach of the clear Consent Order; imposed a $2,500 fine payable to the respondent within 90 days and awarded special costs payable at conclusion; incarceration rejected; on want of prosecution the court found the delay not inordinate after accounting for COVID and other factors and declined to dismiss the family claim, ordering costs in the cause.
Source excerpt
The motion to extend time was denied because the appellant failed to show a reasonable excuse for the delay and the proposed appeal lacked arguable merit: the Consent Order accurately reflected a settlement knowingly entered into by both parties, there was no evidence of fraud or duress, and the appropriate remedy for post‑settlement changes is a variation application in the Family Division requiring leave on proof of material change in circumstances.
Source excerpt
Motion for a stay of eviction and costs pending a leave to appeal was dismissed. The court found no serious issue, and the balance of convenience favoured the landlords.
The court found on the evidence that the parties had a final binding agreement on or about January 20, 2025, that the claimant's January 16, 2025 offer (clarified as final) was accepted by the respondent through counsel's request to draft the amending agreement and by the respondent's conduct in exercising the increased parenting time, and that the terms of that final agreement are those in the draft final order dated February 21, 2025; the court therefore declared the agreement binding, ordered the final order filed and dispensed with the need for the respondent's signature, awarded costs to…
Source excerpt
The court dismissed an application to compel a consent order based on a 2022 agreement and also dismissed a bid to change parenting time from five to seven nights per 14.
The Manulife Defendants were awarded costs because they achieved the bulk of the success via the Consent Order, the Court may consider Tariff C even where an appearance was avoided, the plaintiff's failure to accept a partial offer did not preclude costs liability, and consideration of party cooperation justified a reduced award; accordingly $1,250 was fair to do justice between the parties.
Source excerpt
Appeal allowed in part for procedural unfairness in a family-law parenting dispute. The court set aside parts of the provincial orders and ordered a future hearing with viva voce evidence.
The court dismissed the respondent’s application to vary a consent order, entered the claimant’s proposed order except one paragraph, and awarded special costs from June 6, 2025.
Explore more
