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 Supreme Court held that police could approach a driveway and knock on a truck window under the implied licence, but opening the door was a s. 8 search.
The altered AI-generated images at issue, which create entirely synthetic nude bodies using real identifiable faces, do not fall within the statutory definition of 'intimate image' in s.162.1(2) as a 'visual recording of a person' in the Code; extending the statute to cover such generative-AI deepfakes would amount to judicial legislation and is properly the role of Parliament, therefore the accused is acquitted of the s.162.1(1) allegation.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal for Ontario granted the CCLA leave to intervene in a criminal appeal about privacy, facial recognition technology, and a photograph taken in public.
Ontario Court of Appeal set aside drug-trafficking convictions and ordered new trials after finding the trial judge erred on s. 8 standing, while upholding the verdict analysis.
The court dismissed Mr. Miller’s constitutional challenge and granted an unexplained wealth order under the Civil Forfeiture Act.
Federal Court decision on a CSIS supplemental warrant application concerning IP addresses, privacy under s. 8, passive receipt, and the scope of s. 12 of the CSIS Act.
The court dismissed a s. 8 standing challenge to warrantless seizure of taxi CCTV still images, finding no reasonable expectation of privacy in the neutral images.
The Court of Appeal set aside class certification against RateMDs, holding the pleadings did not disclose a viable privacy or name-use claim and dismissing the action.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial after finding the trial judge used the wrong legal test and missed key evidence on state agency.
The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge's core factual findings were sustained by objective evidence (text messages and photograph) that contradicted the appellant's account; the judge's limited reliance on the complainant's demeanour was an error but not overriding; the trial judge permissibly used the conversational texts and reasonably inferred adoption and sexual purpose; and the complainant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in not being filmed during a sexual assault, so the recording offence was properly made out.
Source excerpt
Explore more
