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 Ontario Court of Appeal held that s. 577 of the Criminal Code allowed a direct indictment after a provincial court election, and dismissed the abuse of process claim.
Application for release pending appeal dismissed. The Court held the appeal was not frivolous, but the public interest in immediate detention outweighed release.
The court held the judicial review was not premature, applied reasonableness review, and found the Commissioner’s decision unreasonable for failing to address the Torani affidavit.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the dismissal of a prohibition application, holding the issues were non-jurisdictional and belonged in the Ontario Court of Justice.
The Court Martial Appeal Court dismissed Doug Allison’s appeal, holding that military jurisdiction and prosecution for impaired driving abroad were lawful and did not violate s. 7.
Judicial review of FOIPPA orders was dismissed in part: the court found the section 44 and section 58 orders reasonable, but remitted narrow issues back to the OIPC for reconsideration.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in R. v. Varennes, holding that a judge-alone trial could be ordered in response to an anticipated s. 11(b) breach during COVID-19.
The judge exercised discretion to give a limited adverse inference instruction because the Crown, in argument, invited the jury to adopt narratives about non-called witnesses without having called them and with knowledge that those witnesses would not have supported the Crown’s narrative; therefore the jury must be told they may, but are not required to, infer that the Crown did not call those witnesses because their evidence would have been unhelpful, while also being reminded that other explanations are possible and that inference must be grounded in evidence rather than speculation. The ci…
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because prosecutorial discretion is only reviewable for egregious abuse of process, the appellant failed to demonstrate conduct of the requisite severity (including no abuse in not consulting expert evidence or in relying on public interest considerations), and the application judge correctly refused an extension of time and would have dismissed the judicial review on the merits.
Source excerpt
The court allowed a narrow new abuse-of-process allegation on witness endangerment, but barred a separate Bassi charge-approval allegation and adjourned the hearing one week.
Explore more
