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
Action dismissed because plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that defendant was owner or keeper, that the dog manifested a propensity to bite people, or that defendant knew of any such propensity; accordingly negligence and occupiers' liability were not established as the attack was not foreseeable.
Source excerpt
The court dismissed an application to strike and a summary trial application in a vehicle-injury case, finding the plaintiff’s interpretation of s. 115 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act was arguable.
The Court of Appeal held that s. 24(3) of the Industrial Roads Act does not immunize the Province from claims about a forest service road excluded from the Act’s definition of industrial road.
Amendment to the defence was permitted because it raised a justiciable legal issue without bad faith and without irreparable evidentiary prejudice; the statutory scheme and collective agreements confer exclusive arbitral jurisdiction over differences arising from the agreement including workplace safety matters, the essential character of the plaintiff's claim falls within that scheme, the court will not exercise residual jurisdiction at this time, and the proper remedy is a stay of proceedings pending arbitration with a two year proviso after which the action will be dismissed if no applicat…
Source excerpt
On a slip-and-fall claim, the court held Alpine must defend and indemnify Ivanhoe under a janitorial contract, but deferred any ruling on damages or settlement payments.
The court dismissed an application to add proposed defendants and amend the notice of civil claim, finding the draft pleading lacked a sufficient factual basis for joinder.
2016 NSSC 354
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's factual finding that the plaintiff did not know and, on the objective s.5(1)(b) test, could not reasonably have known of Festival Hall's potential liability until the tenant's discovery on November 11, 2009; the plaintiff rebutted the presumption in s.5(2) and the motion judge did not err, so the appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The claim as pleaded fell within s.5(1)(c) of PACA, attracting the strict statutory notice requirements of s.7(3)/s.7(1); the appellant failed to serve timely notice and could not rely on absence of prejudice or a 'special circumstances' exception, and the proposed amendment to plead contract would be time‑barred under the Limitations Act — therefore summary judgment dismissing the action was correct.
Source excerpt
Costs ruling after a jury assault trial: Scale B, 1.5 counsel units, enhanced costs from January 15, 2014, and a Sanderson order for two defendants.
Explore more
