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 dismissed a father's application to reopen a parenting decision, granted limited clarifications, ordered a fall 2024 review, and directed the parties to share report costs equally.
Because evidence presented at the penalty phase raised a plausible defence that could vitiate earlier contempt findings, the judge must address the fairness issue by either (a) declaring a mistrial, vacating the findings and ordering a rehearing before a different judge without requiring re‑filing, or (b) vacating the findings and reopening the initial phase to admit the penalty‑phase evidence, but only with the consent of both parties; the parties were ordered to advise the court of their consent by June 2, 2017, failing which the matter will proceed under option (a).
Source excerpt
The trial judge erred by treating the appellant's inconsistent self-reports as automatically excluding weight from the experts' opinions without undertaking the necessary analysis to reconcile or prefer the competing psychiatric opinions and by mistakenly concluding she lacked jurisdiction to reopen the NCR hearing; the fairness of the process was thereby impaired and a new NCR hearing is required.
Source excerpt
The court refused to reopen a summary trial to admit a late psychologist’s report, finding the evidence came too late, raised relevance and admissibility issues, and would prejudice the defendant.
The court refused to reopen an extradition committal hearing to admit two translated statements, holding they were not truly new, were irrelevant, and would not change the result.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an RPD refusal to reopen a refugee-status vacation proceeding, holding no breach of natural justice and no material impact from new ICTR evidence.
The application to set aside the judgment was dismissed because the appellant alleged no fraud, did not assert the existence of evidence that could not reasonably have been found prior to the hearing, and provided no supporting affidavit or other evidentiary material; accordingly there was no basis under Rule 172(2)(a) to reopen the judgment.
Source excerpt
The court held that orders reopening matters under Rule 59.06 due to facts arising after a dismissal are interlocutory because they do not finally determine rights, and that the nature of the order, not the reasons, governs whether an appeal lies to this court; accordingly the appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed without prejudice and the appellant may seek leave from the Divisional Court.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court allowed judicial review, finding the Board failed to assess whether new ICTR evidence showed a breach of natural justice in reopening the vacation decision.
The court upheld limited relief from forfeiture for self-represented tenants on reserve land, finding the Law and Equity Act could apply through s. 88 of the Indian Act.
Explore more
