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 Federal Court struck Dr. Fox’s claim as an abuse of process because it relitigated issues already rejected by the British Columbia Court of Appeal.
The court enforced a prior Antunes production order, rejected FOIPPA and public-interest objections to censored video images, and ordered production and costs.
The Federal Court struck Haida’s claim against the Ship-Source Oil Pollution Fund Administrator without leave to amend, finding no pleaded cause of action and issue estoppel.
The Federal Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge’s setting aside of the prothonotary’s order that struck TRREB’s copyright claims without leave to amend because the prothonotary palpably and overridingly erred in treating the works alleged in TRREB’s statement of claim as identical to those in TREB v. Canada; originality is a contextual, mixed fact‑and‑law determination and the prior decision could not be used as a substitute for proof without evidence, but a technical inconsistency in the motion judge’s order (granting leave to amend when leave was unnecessary under the Rules) warranted c…
Source excerpt
The court dismissed Brendan Ghag’s claims, granted a vexatious litigant order, and awarded special costs after finding repeated meritless and abusive litigation.
The appeal is dismissed: the SST-AD correctly found no breach of procedural fairness, correctly declined to re-weigh or overturn the SST-GD's evidentiary findings under the statutory standard, and correctly held that the Superior Court's provincial finding under the SLRA did not bind CPP determinations because the statutory definitions and parties differ; accordingly issue estoppel and abuse of process did not bar the SST-GD from deciding entitlement to the CPP survivor's pension.
Source excerpt
Appeal from a CFCSA custody/access order was dismissed as moot after a later FLA consent parenting order superseded the earlier order.
The Federal Court struck two statements of claim as an abuse of process, finding they tried to bypass earlier rulings in related Hutton proceedings.
The amended s.25(1) of the IRPA constitutes an absolute bar to consideration of H&C applications by persons who are inadmissible under sections 34, 35 or 37; H&C officers have no jurisdiction to re‑determine prior final inadmissibility findings of the Immigration Division even where later jurisprudence changes the legal test; the appellant may instead seek ministerial relief under s.42.1.
Source excerpt
The court held the 2009 transfer of the Abbotsford property was a bona fide sale, not a trust arrangement or disguised mortgage, and awarded the foreclosure surplus and arrears to the defendants.
Explore more
