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 Tax Court quashed Mr. Amador’s application for extension of time to object because he did not file it within 30 days of the Minister’s refusal.
The Tax Court quashed Owen Warner’s extension-of-time application because he filed it almost 14 months after the Minister’s refusal, outside the mandatory 90-day limit.
The Court upheld the trial judge's factual finding that Nova Fish breached Sections 8.1 and 8.4 by failing to act for 16 months but held as a matter of law that a 'time is of the essence' clause does not apply to provisions that fix no definite time (eg 'promptly' or 'commercially reasonable efforts'); therefore Cold Ocean was not entitled to terminate and Nova Fish was entitled to specific performance.
Source excerpt
The court dismissed a specific performance claim over rural property after finding the contract terminated when buyer conditions were not removed by the deadline.
The court held that only client contact information fell within the business assets and clause 24(h) of the purchase agreement; confidential client records did not.
La Cour a conclu à une entente orale conditionnelle sur des frais plus élevés et a jugé que la lettre du 3 juillet 2018 suffisait comme preuve; la demande du demandeur est accueillie.
The April 11, 2014 amendment reclassified CAD 2,000,000 as a bond/escrow amount to be used 'throughout the Term' of the forgivable loan and the August 25, 2014 amendment expressly confirmed the Province had no further financial obligations or commitments under the LOO; consequently the Province had no contractual obligation to re‑disburse the CAD 1,874,857.15 returned from the surety bond and did not breach the LOO.
Source excerpt
The court held that Article 13 did not limit the buyer to one extension of the outside date and did not cause automatic termination when the date passed.
The court dismissed a summary trial application over a cannabis retail lease, finding credibility conflicts and unresolved issues about a condition precedent and alleged regulatory misrepresentation.
The Court affirmed that the vendor provided substantially compliant estoppel and lease extension documents and acted in good faith and commercially reasonably; the purchaser refused to engage and failed to act reasonably and in good faith under the agreement, thereby repudiating the contract and forfeiting the right to recover the deposit, so the appeal must be dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
