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 Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal from summary judgment, holding that a broad settlement release barred the claims and that no trial issue remained.
The Board reasonably concluded it lacked jurisdiction because assignment to detector dog handling duties did not constitute an appointment under the PSEA given the job description and Call Letter of Interest, and because this conclusion was consistent with binding authority (Smith); accordingly dismissal on a motion to dismiss was appropriate and no breach of procedural fairness occurred because the Board was statutorily authorized to decide without an oral hearing and the applicant had a meaningful opportunity to respond.
Source excerpt
The motion for leave to review was dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances or a serious risk of miscarriage of justice; the chambers judge acted within jurisdiction, properly used correspondence procedures, and reasonably concluded dismissal for failure to perfect the appeal was appropriate.
Source excerpt
Section 15(4)(b) of the Limitations Act, 2002 suspends the ultimate 15‑year limitation period only where the claimant had the claim while a minor and was not represented by a litigation guardian during that time; because Ms. Wong had no claim until after majority, s.15(4)(b) did not toll the ultimate limitation period and the claims relating to the 1987 permits are statute‑barred.
Source excerpt
Because the parties consented to dismissal, the court dismissed the motion and exercised its discretion to reserve costs to the panel that will hear the appeal.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court dismissed Bruce Wenham’s motion for costs against the Attorney General of Canada in a class proceeding, ordering no costs.
Federal Court dismissed a “meta motion” to stop a summary trial in a patent infringement case, held discovery completion was not required, and extended the hearing to five days.
The notice of appeal failed to identify any legal error by the Federal Court and merely reasserted the same unparticularized allegations previously rejected; because the appeal has no reasonable prospect of success and is frivolous/vexatious, it is dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
Appellant failed to satisfy the public interest balancing requirement in s.137.1(4)(b) because there was no evidence of significant monetary or reputational harm, the impugned expressions related to a matter of public interest and had limited circulation, and timely retraction/apology (where given) mitigated harm; accordingly the motions dismissing the proceedings were correctly decided, the s.137.1(9) damages awards were compensatory rather than punitive and did not warrant interference, and leave to appeal the costs awards was properly denied.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court allowed Amgen Canada Inc. to proceed with its section 6.08 motion under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations and dismissed the plaintiffs’ motion with costs.
Explore more
