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 Ontario Court of Appeal granted intervention motions in a class-action appeal about the Ragoonanan principle, imposing tight limits on factums, reply rights, and oral argument.
The application for summary dismissal was dismissed because the court was not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the plaintiff's wills variation claim has no chance of success; the Court of Appeal's rulings in Hope and Peri do not foreclose all claims by non-biological, non-adopted persons and Peri expressly left open expansion where a sufficiently compelling factual matrix exists, which raises triable issues that cannot be resolved summarily under Rule 9-6(5).
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that relitigation of the same issue decided in Anderson (that the Covenant was void for uncertainty) constituted an abuse of process; the chambers judge erred in law by treating differences in evidence as creating a different issue and erred in her alternative exercise of discretion by failing to apply CUPE's rigorous framework; the Disclosure Statement did not meet the threshold for new evidence or justify denying issue preclusion, and the Covenant must be declared void and the cancellation orders granted against the appellants' properties.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed the Province’s appeal, holding universal CLBC benefits must be deducted from future care damages, and dismissed the cross appeal on nighttime care.
On a disclosure application in a sexual assault prosecution, the court held a redacted police statement was not a “record” under the Mills regime and ordered disclosure.
Leave to appeal denied because the Applicant failed to show an arguable error by the General Division that would give a reasonable chance of success: bias was not established; any legal errors identified (e.g. treatment of Bill of Rights process) were non-prejudicial or irrelevant to the antedate remedy; the General Division applied the correct antedating test under s.10(4) EI Act and its factual findings about delay and the Applicant's evidence were supported by the record.
Source excerpt
Religious Hospitallers was wrongly decided by importing an unwritten "endeavour" or private fundraising requirement; s.3(1)12(iii) must be interpreted with a dual-purpose approach: an applicant must (i) own, use and occupy the land, (ii) be a charitable non-profit philanthropic corporation, (iii) be organized for the relief of the poor meaning the property’s primary purpose or a part-purpose including an element of economic deprivation, and (iv) be supported in part by public funds (government funding). Applying that test, Stamford Kiwanis meets s.3(1)12(iii) and is entitled to exemptions for…
Source excerpt
The Board exceeded its jurisdiction by expanding redetermination beyond the specific errors identified in this Court’s JR Decision (the omitted payment data for three Canadian proxy services and the wrong profit margin), and by reintroducing a 25% profit margin for US proxy services; the Redetermination Decision is set aside and the Court directs the Board to issue a new certified Tariff with specified per-subscriber rates for large systems for 2014–2018.
Source excerpt
The court held that the 2011 faint hope amendments, when combined with s. 745(a), violated s. 12 of the Charter, but dismissed the other Charter challenges.
The Court of Appeal held it was bound by Highway Properties and attendant Ontario Court of Appeal authority: a landlord that refuses to accept repudiation and insists the lease remain in force owes no duty to mitigate; additionally s.19.03 of the lease limits lost annual rent to two years only where the landlord terminates the lease, and therefore the clause did not cap damages where the landlord kept the lease alive; appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
