Canada Case Law

Galang v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Parts 1 and 3 of the Further Amended Notice of Civil Claim were struck out with leave to amend because the pleadings contained substantial amounts of evidence and unnecessary material and failed to concisely plead material facts and the specific elements required to meet statutory immunities and vicarious liability issues; summary judgment was denied because affidavit evidence was inadequate, hearsay concerns and disputed records created genuine issues for trial; security for costs was denied because plaintiff's impecuniosity and steps taken to address finances made an order disproportionate…

Source excerpt

• Striking pleadings
• Summary judgment
• Security for costs
• Vicarious liability
• Statutory immunity
• Mental health act detention

Read case analysis

Bonnis v. Clark

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff lacked capacity to consent to the sexual activity due to intoxication (alcohol induced anterograde amnesia), but the defendant honestly and reasonably believed she was consenting; consequently the defendant established the reasonable belief defence and is not liable in civil sexual battery. Statements by the plaintiff that the defendant touched her sexually without consent are substantially true (truth defence), statements asserting he had sex with her while she was unconscious were not true but were protected by qualified privilege in the context…

Source excerpt

• Consent
• Capacity to consent
• Intoxication and blackouts
• Reasonable belief in consent
• Qualified privilege
• Truth defence

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

W.A.M. v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Because the alleged tortious acts occurred in or about 1972, prior to August 1, 1974, binding authority establishes Crown immunity for pre-CPA private law claims and thus there is no genuine issue for trial; separately, defending within the parameters of the Rules (including conducting examinations for discovery and amending pleadings) does not give rise to a novel duty to apply a "trauma-informed response" nor to a reasonable claim for intentional infliction of mental suffering, so those pleaded causes of action disclose no reasonable prospect of success and must be dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Crown immunity
• Statute retroactivity
• Trauma-informed response
• Duty of care
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Summary judgment

Read case analysis

Fleury v. Budd

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the parties were spouses under the Family Law Act, divided the gain on excluded property equally, and dismissed the tort claims.

• Spousal status under family law act
• Division of family property (fla ss.81,84,87,95)
• Valuation date for family property
• Excluded property (fla s.85)
• Cohabitation agreement / oral agreement
• Similar fact and collateral evidence

Read case analysis

M.R.P. v. Smith

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found repeated childhood sexual assault and battery by the defendant, dismissed intentional infliction of mental suffering, and awarded damages.

• Sexual assault
• Sexual battery
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Damages
• Causation
• Evidence (credibility and prior consistent statements)

Read case analysis

Akonwie v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The Supreme Court of British Columbia struck a self-represented plaintiff’s civil claim against health authorities under Rule 9-5, finding the pleadings prolix and missing material facts.

• Rule 9-5 striking pleadings
• Negligence - duty/breach/causation
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Charter s.7 claim
• Statutory privacy remedy
• Liability of independent physicians

Read case analysis

Ewonde v. Canada (the King)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed Serge Ewonde’s action as statute-barred and rejected his negligence claims concerning inmate property seized at a federal institution.

• Negligence
• Limitation periods
• Misfeasance in public office
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Charter damages
• Summary trial procedure

Read case analysis

Craig v His Majesty the King

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court struck a pleadings claim by a DFO employee and his spouse, holding the employee’s claim was barred by s. 236 FPSLRA and the spouse’s tort claims were inadequately pleaded.

• Grievance jurisdiction
• Fpslra s.236 jurisdictional bar
• Charter remedies and s.24
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Negligent infliction of mental suffering
• Duty of care to third parties

Read case analysis

Athanassiades v. Rogers Communications Canada Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to decide interlocutory aspects of the Order absent Divisional Court leave, the appellant failed to segregate final and interlocutory grounds, and it is procedurally inefficient and premature to hear an appeal before completion of the summary judgment motion (including the directed mini-trial).

Source excerpt

• Summary judgment
• Interlocutory appeal
• Mini-trial under rule 20.04(2.2)
• Spoliation
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Partial summary judgment

Read case analysis