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
Contrôle judiciaire rejeté : la Cour fédérale conclut que la résolution 7337 et le Règlement 2022-01 étaient valides et conformes à la procédure applicable.
The court granted derivative leave because the applicant proved it acted in good faith and the claim was in CF Energy's best interests: the underlying contractual claim was viable and substantial; the respondent's evidence of a board decision to litigate in China was too vague to attract full business-judgment deference, and there is a reasonable prospect an Ontario court would extend time to permit service of the 2022 Statement of Claim; accordingly leave under s.232(2) BCA was appropriate while security for costs was deferred and left open for later application.
Source excerpt
The statutory right-of-way registered in 1973 is enforceable; the holder must restore the surface to the condition that existed immediately prior to each entry unless such restoration is not practicable or the servient owner acted in bad faith in making improvements that materially increase the cost or inconvenience of restoration; the servient owner may not deliberately or negligently block access (punitive self-help is unlawful); gates are permissible but may be locked only if the holder is provided a working key or access code; the holder should provide 24 hours' notice absent an emergency…
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal in a commercial lease dispute, upholding findings that loss of loading-dock access was a repudiatory breach and that interim steps did not bar termination.
The court granted an interlocutory injunction preventing the cutoff of fire and emergency services to a reserve development, and declined to require an undertaking in damages.
The arbitrator's decision was patently unreasonable because she repeatedly misstated and conflated the statutory test—treating 'extenuating circumstances' as 'exceptional circumstances'—and relied on irrelevant good faith/section 49.2 analogies and timeline findings that undermined the required s.51(3) analysis; given legislative amendments limiting the Director's monetary jurisdiction, the appropriate remedy is remittal to the Supreme Court for rehearing rather than to the RTB; the Director, not named in the notice of appeal, must be added by application under the Court of Appeal Rules.
Source excerpt
Application by Trigon for further document production was dismissed because the requests were overly broad, insufficiently particularized, and unsupported by evidence of undisclosed producible documents.
Can*Sport/Adamski are presently insolvent, have not paid the trial costs award nor provided evidence of available resources to satisfy prospective appeal costs, and HarbourEdge demonstrated an objective risk of non‑recovery; accordingly special circumstances exist and security for costs is warranted in the sum of $30,000, with failure to pay permitting HarbourEdge to move to dismiss the appeal.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld leave for a derivative action, refused to validate a pre-leave filing nunc pro tunc, and replaced special costs with Scale B costs.
Applying the single inquiry from Simmons, the Adjudicator found on the balance of probabilities that the Respondents failed to provide credible, consistent evidence of a genuine intention to occupy the units: conflicting affidavits, nonappearance of key owners, lack of current addresses, vacant units left unoccupied, and financial motives undermined the claim of good faith; therefore the Director's orders for possession were reversed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
