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 the Bank of Montreal’s appeal from the dismissal of its civil fraud claim against Makhija.
Although the chambers judge erred by not considering contextual indicia of proximity arising from the June 25, 2020 email, the error was not material because the apparent purpose of the respondent's representation (to induce purchase of shares in CAP) did not correspond to the pleaded detrimental reliance (entry into the SHO Agreement); reliance falling outside the purpose of the undertaking is not reasonable or foreseeable, so no proximate relationship and no duty of care exists and there is no genuine issue for trial.
Source excerpt
The court dismissed a family property claim to a one-quarter interest, finding no binding contract, no proprietary estoppel, and no unjust enrichment.
The seller's inaccurate representation that a septic system existed constituted a non-fraudulent but actionable misrepresentation; the buyer reasonably relied on that representation and is entitled to damages covering the cost to locate and install a functional septic system plus search costs and general damages. The realtor and brokerage were not liable because they reasonably relied on the seller's representations and had contractual protections.
Source excerpt
Summary trial in a misrepresentation and investment dispute was refused for Dr. Hassam because central facts were hotly contested, but the claim against Ms. Hassam was dismissed.
The Court of Appeal allowed Ms. Sewell’s appeal, finding the seller’s disclosure statement misrepresented knowledge of an unpermitted addition and requiring return of the $300,000 deposit.
The claim is dismissed because the adjudicator found no established negligent misrepresentation and, alternatively, no causation or quantifiable damages proven; the claimants were willfully blind to publicly available passport requirements and failed to mitigate.
Source excerpt
The court admitted an economist’s affidavit on certification reconsideration and refused some proposed pleading amendments, holding CPA discretion—not Palmer fresh-evidence rules—applied.
The accused was acquitted of fraud over $5,000 after the court found the Crown had not proved ICBC relied on any false statement to make TTD payments.
The appeal is dismissed because Reset failed to establish the requisite proximity/undertaking and reasonable reliance to found a duty of care; alternatively, there was no breach as delays were based on legitimate safety concerns and not solely Hydro One's responsibility; and Reset failed to prove causation because the trial judge rejected the key witness's credibility and no customers testified they declined business due to delays.
Source excerpt
Explore more
