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
La Cour suprême reconnaît le délit d’intimate partner violence fondé sur le contrôle coercitif dans une relation intime et confirme 100 000 $ en dommages compensatoires.
The Supreme Court of Canada recognized a new tort of intimate partner violence, holding that coercive control in a marital relationship can create a distinct civil wrong.
On balance of probabilities the court found AL credible and MW's allegations of sexual abuse and coercive control unproven; the child's best interests support shared parenting under AL's proposed eight‑day rotation with specific modifications; prospective child support set by shared‑custody set‑off to $475/month from April 1, 2026 and prospective s.7 expenses apportioned 63% AL/37% MW; retroactive table child support for Sep 2021–Aug 2022 was declined due to demonstrated burdens AL incurred to exercise parenting time, but AL was ordered to pay $31,536 by periodic payments of $350/month in add…
Source excerpt
The court accepted the s.211 evaluator's findings and the father's credibility on financial evidence, found no proven physical abuse or coercive control, found an unhealthy mother-child alignment meriting remedial intervention, concluded shared parenting time equally after a staged transition is in the child's best interests, maintained joint guardianship while temporarily allocating exclusive decision-making for education/extracurriculars to the father for six months plus five weeks to monitor cooperation, found no divisible matrimonial assets of value at separation (law firm had no goodwill…
Source excerpt
On the evidence and law the court found unjust enrichment in relation to the IP property but not the SB property; no juristic reason prevented recovery and a joint family venture was not established, so equal division of net equity of IP was ordered (value fixed at average of appraisals $732,000 less encumbrances and disposition costs yielding net equity $687,426 and equalization to applicant $343,713); family‑violence findings establish applicant (Ocean) as perpetrator and victim (Bennett) as recipient of abuse, the novel tort of family violence is not recognized here and assault/battery dam…
Source excerpt
Appeal dismissed; judge did not commit reversible error. Under s.51(2) hearsay recorded in CSSD files may be admitted and relied upon where the judge assesses reliability and where statements are corroborated by social worker observations or admissions by the parent; coercive control falls within a purposive interpretation of "violence" under the Act; the hearing was procedurally fair and the judge's factual findings were supported by evidence and entitled to deference.
Source excerpt
On a balance of probabilities the respondent established family violence (physical injuries corroborated by unrefuted photographs and supporting affidavit evidence) and that she was the primary caregiver pre-separation; given the proven family violence and its impact on the children the least disruptive protective interim arrangement is to place interim primary care with the mother and to permit supervised parenting for the father subject to rehabilitation, supervised access protocols and third‑party channels for records, thereby protecting the children while preserving parental relationship…
Source excerpt
Trial family-law reasons addressing parenting, support, property division, and protection orders. The Court kept shared parenting, ordered child support, and divided property with exclusions.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of a refused Temporary Resident Permit application, finding the officer unreasonably ignored ongoing coercive control and failed to assess broader TRP factors.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding the trial judge's relocation decision must be set aside because his written reasons disclose material errors of fact and law: significant misapprehension and omission of evidence regarding alleged coercive control, unfounded assumptions about the mother's and maternal family's attitude to the child's Indian heritage and community in Ireland, improper recharacterization of the relocation as a support case, and erroneous application of the burden/presumption under s.16.93; the proper remedy is a new trial on an expedited basis if parties cannot ag…
Source excerpt
Explore more
