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 Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed a judicial review of a CRT decision arising from a cat-sitting arrangement, finding no procedural unfairness, legal error, or reversible factual error.
The appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that she had severe functional limitations by December 31, 2023 because there was no medical evidence for 2022–2023 to substantiate the claimed limitations; therefore the disability was not severe and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The court assessed damages after a bicycle-van collision, awarding general damages, past income loss, future care, and special expenses while rejecting some claimed losses.
The applicant filed the leave application late and failed to demonstrate an arguable case under s58(1) DESDA; absent an arguable case or other compelling special circumstances, it is not in the interests of justice to extend time, therefore both the extension and leave to appeal are refused.
Source excerpt
Leave to appeal was granted because the General Division committed an error of law by failing to consider the combined effect of the applicant's physical and mental impairments as required by Bungay, creating an arguable ground with a reasonable chance of success under s.58.
Source excerpt
The panel found the claimant not credible due to contradictions and material omissions and concluded he failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by not filing complaints or producing clear and convincing evidence; accordingly the claim was dismissed and he is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.
Source excerpt
The panel rejected the claim because the principal claimant's testimony was found not credible (inconsistencies, unexplained omissions, failure to produce or corroborate central employment evidence) and, alternatively, even if credible, an internal flight alternative existed within Mexico; accordingly the claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.
Source excerpt
The panel rejected the claims because the claimants failed to discharge the burden of proof: their testimony contained material inconsistencies and late additions, they failed to produce supporting documentation or medical reports, they did not seek state protection, and reasonable internal flight alternatives existed; accordingly they are neither Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.
Source excerpt
The consent given by the appellant's representative in the Tax Court was valid and not vitiated by the alleged stress or intimidation; the appellant bore the burden of requesting production of T5 slips and adducing evidence; accordingly the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
The court dismissed an application to access materials already sent to U.S. authorities, holding it had no jurisdiction to order disclosure from a foreign sovereign.
Explore more
