Canada Case Law

Bowles v. Al Mulla Group

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge properly applied the forum of necessity doctrine, found the appellant failed to produce cogent corroborating evidence that he could not safely pursue his claims in Kuwait and that refugee status alone did not meet the high threshold; therefore the stay for want of jurisdiction was correctly imposed and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Forum of necessity
• Stay for want of jurisdiction
• Real and substantial connection
• Refugee status
• Jurisdictional discretion
• Conspiracy

Read case analysis

Hosseinkhani v. QK Fitness Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge correctly concluded on the factual record that the respondents were not negligent because the round dumbbell did not create an unusual hazard and the risk of rolling was obvious, no duty to warn arose, and there was no basis to overturn those findings; accordingly the summary judgment dismissing the appellants’ claims was affirmed.

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Duty to warn
• Assumption of risk/obvious risk
• Exclusion clause
• Summary judgment
• Personal injury

Read case analysis

Brennan v. Colindres

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held the trial judge erred in treating a pleading issue as res judicata and ordered a new trial.

• Personal injury
• Amendment of pleadings
• Res judicata
• Admissibility of evidence
• Sufficiency of pleadings
• Res-judicata

Read case analysis

Saleh v. Nebel

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Because the matter involved issues appropriately within the Divisional Court's statutory appellate jurisdiction under s.19(1.2) of the CJA and relevant precedents, the appeal and related cross-appeal must be transferred to the Divisional Court under s.110(1) of the CJA; the panel therefore ordered transfer and declined to award thrown away costs for the proceedings in this court.

Source excerpt

• Personal injury
• Causation
• Statutory threshold immunity
• Jurisdiction of appeal
• Costs

Read case analysis

Healey v. Chung

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Appeal allowed in a personal injury damages case. The court held two consulting psychiatric notes were not compliant expert reports and that material evidence had been misapprehended.

• Personal injury
• Expert evidence admissibility
• Clinical records
• Credibility findings
• Mitigation of damages
• Supreme court civil rules r.11-2 r.11-6 r.11-7

Read case analysis

Dhillon v. Jaffer

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Supplementary reasons on court order interest: interest was added to the $5,000 loss-of-opportunity award, but not to the $40,000 general damages award.

• Court order interest act
• Pre-judgment interest
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Personal injury
• Loss of opportunity
• General damages

Read case analysis

Cahoon v. Brideaux

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Court of Appeal dismissed a personal injury appeal, rejecting claims of unfair trial conduct, erroneous jury instructions, and an inadequate damages award.

• Personal injury
• Damages
• Jury verdict
• Trial conduct
• Litigation privilege
• Discovery

Read case analysis

Watkins v. Hines

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court continued the limited stay of proceedings because the applicant met the onus: allowing immediate trials would produce repetitive constitutional litigation across numerous non-test cases and risk conflicting rulings. Granting the stay preserves procedural fairness and efficiency; the demonstrated prejudice to the defendant from delay is not greater than the prejudice to the plaintiff and does not outweigh the benefits of a consolidated resolution through the test cases. The stay will remain pending decisions on leave to appeal and, if leave is granted, until final Supreme Court deter…

Source excerpt

• Stay of proceedings
• Statutory cap on damages
• Personal injury
• Leave to appeal
• Procedural fairness
• Test case management

Read case analysis

Wheeldon v. Magee

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Costs assessment after a personal injury jury trial. The court apportioned trial preparation units around an Offer to Settle, reduced some expert fees, and disallowed unnecessary travel costs.

• Personal injury
• Costs assessment
• Expert fees
• Offers to settle (rule 37b)
• Apportionment of trial preparation costs
• Costs-assessment

Read case analysis

Knauf v. Chao

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, reduced the jury’s non-pecuniary damages award, and held no new trial was required.

• Personal injury
• Non-pecuniary damages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Oath-helping
• Jury instructions
• Counsel impropriety

Read case analysis