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 Federal Court awarded the successful respondent costs, holding that the Haiti sanctions regime did not prevent the Court from making a costs order.
The Federal Court correctly identified and applied the three‑prong Rule 167 test, reasonably concluded that alternatives to dismissal had been exhausted, and did not commit a palpable and overriding error in its findings of fact and mixed fact and law; the April 16, 2024 case management direction did not relieve the appellant of outstanding undertakings or preclude the respondent from bringing a Rule 167 motion, therefore the appeal is dismissed and the dismissal for undue delay is confirmed.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and a fresh evidence motion because the appellant remained in breach of court orders, the appeal lacked merit, and it was a collateral attack.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Cole’s appeal, holding the Law Society review board did not fetter its discretion or misapply the sanctioning principles.
The court granted family-law interim relief, ordering a $75,000 distribution, a $1,250 payment and $1,250 fine for breach of a restraining order, plus fixed costs and disclosure.
Judicial review of an RCMP discipline appeal was dismissed. The Court held the Applicant waived any oral-hearing complaint and found no reviewable error in the Commissioner’s decision.
The court found Jagsir Sidhu in contempt for breaching an injunction and a document production order, and accepted a negotiated CAD 75,000 payment as a satisfactory remedy.
The court awarded special costs against all defendants, jointly and severally, finding reprehensible litigation conduct including late admissions, disclosure failures, and false testimony.
The Board’s By‑law authorizing reconsideration is a reasonable exercise of the broad statutory powers conferred by the Education Act; given that express reconsideration authority, re‑litigation doctrines and functus officio do not bar reconsideration, and deference is owed to the Board’s reasoned determination. Applying the Doré proportionality framework, the Board reasonably balanced Charter freedoms against its statutory duty to maintain an inclusive school climate, so the Merits and Sanction Decisions were reasonable and must be upheld.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court struck Saint-Rémy’s judicial review as premature, holding that the section 8 delisting process under the Haiti Regulations was an adequate alternative remedy.
Explore more
