Canada Case Law

Chad v. Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Paletta Estate correctly interprets Stewart and Walls; where objective evidence shows an activity that appears commercial was undertaken with the purpose of realizing a loss rather than pursuing profit, that activity is not a source of income; the Tax Court properly applied this principle to find the appellant intended to incur a loss and thus had no source of income, so the reassessment was correctly confirmed.

Source excerpt

• Source of income
• Pursuit of profit
• Sham transactions
• Tax reassessment
• Standards of review

Read case analysis

Oleynik v. Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed: the Court held the appeal judge did not err — case management ordered without oral argument did not breach procedural fairness given inherent jurisdiction and rules; additional evidence was irrelevant and not admitted; no reasonable apprehension of bias or conflict established; the record was complete; amendments made were limited to clerical corrections; no palpable and overriding errors were shown. Costs awarded to respondent under Column 3.

Source excerpt

• Procedural fairness
• Conflict of interest
• Admission of additional evidence
• Case management
• Functus officio
• Duty of good faith

Read case analysis

Superintendent of Real Estate v. Financial Services Tribunal

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The Court concluded the Hearing Officer's Liability Decision was reasonable and procedurally fair: the Hearing Officer had a rational, transparent chain of analysis that supported findings that the $50,000 advanced was a loan and that advancing those funds placed the licensee in a conflict of interest; the FST Panel Chair's conclusion that the Liability Decision was unreasonable and procedurally unfair misapprehended the Hearing Officer's reliance on evidence and exceeded the FST's remedial scope by effectively staying the disciplinary process; the FST order was quashed, the Hearing Officer's…

Source excerpt

• Judicial review
• Reasonableness standard
• Procedural fairness
• Conflict of interest
• Hearsay evidence
• Remedies and remittal

Read case analysis

Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision in a refugee matter, upholding refusal of new evidence, no oral hearing, and a Mumbai IFA finding.

• Internal flight alternative
• Procedural fairness
• Admissibility of evidence
• Standards of review
• Judicial review
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

Coote v. British Columbia Civil Liberties Association

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from judicial review of a Human Rights Tribunal screening decision, finding no reviewable error, bias, or procedural unfairness.

• Screening under human rights code s.27(1)(b)
• Procedural fairness
• Reasonable apprehension of bias/recusal
• Standards of review
• Judicial review of tribunal decisions
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

Murphy v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court correctly applied the Sierra Club/Sherman confidentiality test and proportionality principles, and there was no palpable and overriding error in limiting redactions rather than sealing the entire motion record; the Privacy Act s.8(1) issue was not required to decide the Rule 151 motion; appeal dismissed with costs of $500 CAD.

Source excerpt

• Confidentiality orders
• Open court principle
• Redaction and sealing
• Privacy act s.8(1)
• Standards of review
• Proportionality and minimal impairment

Read case analysis

Michel v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Federal Court rightly struck the Statement of Claim for lack of pleaded material facts supporting a s.15 cause of action, but erred in refusing leave to amend because a systemic s.15 claim based on aggregate overclassification by CRS and related tools could disclose a tenable cause of action and raise common questions suitable for class treatment; appellate court amends order to permit one Fresh as Amended Statement of Claim and one reapplication for certification on the same evidentiary record, remitting issues of commonality, preferability and representative adequacy back to the Federal Cou…

Source excerpt

• Section 15 charter
• Certification under federal courts rules
• Class definition and subclasses
• Amendment of pleadings
• Predictive validity of risk assessment tools (crs,sfa,dfi-a,rp)
• Section 79.1 corrections and conditional release act

Read case analysis

Bell Telephone Company of Canada v. Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The judge did not err in law in applying the O.A. Brown test because the statutory definitions were broad and did not clearly mandate treating invoice line items as separate supplies; on the facts, the judge reasonably and non-palpably-erred-ly concluded that delivery and regulatory charges were integral components of a single supply of electricity by Local Distributors, and therefore the appeal is dismissed with costs.

Source excerpt

• Input tax credits
• Recapture of provincial itcs
• Single vs multiple supply
• O.a. brown test
• Invoice itemization
• Standards of review

Read case analysis

Vetrici v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed: the Federal Court had jurisdiction to judicially review CRA decisions on CERB/CRB eligibility; the Tax Court does not have exclusive jurisdiction over income determinations made for benefit eligibility; remedial discretion to remit rather than direct an outcome was properly exercised and not shown to involve palpable and overriding error; the Federal Court’s costs decision was within its discretion.

Source excerpt

• Standards of review
• Remedies
• Jurisdictional scope
• Benefits eligibility
• Costs

Read case analysis

Rahman v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court upheld the RAD’s dismissal of a refugee appeal, finding no procedural unfairness, no error in refusing new evidence, and viable internal flight alternatives.

• Admissibility of new evidence
• Internal flight alternative (ifa)
• Credibility assessment
• Standards of review
• Document authenticity
• Immigration-law

Read case analysis