Canada Case Law

Strauber v. Cohen

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Because the appellant's Charter s.2(a) claim raises issues that require adjudicative facts (notably sincerity and the extent of interference) and because the respondent's cross-appeal relies on the same testimony, the Registrar ordered the appellant to obtain transcripts of the parties' testimony at trial; cost concerns acknowledged but cannot justify depriving the Court of the evidence necessary to decide the appeal or to exercise discretion on entertaining new Charter arguments on appeal.

Source excerpt

• Get (religious divorce)
• Freedom of religion (s.2(a) charter)
• Contempt
• Transcript settlement
• Admission of new constitutional arguments on appeal
• Child and spousal support

Read case analysis

Greenblue Urban North America Inc. v. Deeproot Green Infrastructure, LLC et AL.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Allow specific Tariff B units and disbursements as assessed: Items 17, 18, 19 and 21 allowed as claimed; Item 22 second counsel disallowed absent court direction; Item 27 partly allowed at reduced units; special secretarial overtime and meeting expenses disallowed; printing and binding allowed in reduced amount with colour limited to 5% of copies; resulting monetary awards fixed for appeal and cross-appeal and HST adjusted accordingly.

Source excerpt

• Costs assessment
• Appeal
• Cross-appeal
• Tariff b
• Disbursements
• Assessment officer discretion

Read case analysis

Sinclair v. T.D.M.C. Holdings Ltd.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held that a cross-appeal from an arbitral award is subject to the Arbitration Act’s 30-day leave deadline and quashed TDMC’s late application.

• Leave to appeal
• Cross-appeal
• Time limits
• Jurisdiction to hear appeals from arbitral awards
• Arbitration
• Appellate-procedure

Read case analysis

Chippewas of Saugeen First Nation v. South Bruce Peninsula (Town)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Given the complexity, length and significance of the appeals, and prevailing principles that unsuccessful appellants should ordinarily pay costs, the court fixed partial indemnity costs at the amounts claimed: Town and the Families to pay Saugeen $176,294.43 (all inclusive); Town to pay Canada $110,120.00 (all inclusive). The court rejected the argument that Crown wrongdoing justified departing from ordinary costs rules and noted the Town’s indemnity claim against Canada is reserved for Phase II.

Source excerpt

• Appeal
• Costs award
• Partial indemnity costs
• Cross-appeal
• Crown liability
• Boundary demarcation

Read case analysis

Promotion in Motion, Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Where a respondent does not seek a different disposition of the final judgment, it need not file a cross-appeal to challenge the trial judge's reasons or evidentiary rulings; a respondent may advance alternative grounds in its responding memorandum to uphold the judgment, so the motion to strike fails and the respondent's cross-motion is unnecessary.

Source excerpt

• Fresh evidence
• Cross-appeal
• Interlocutory appeal
• Admissibility of evidence
• Rule 397
• Costs

Read case analysis

T.O. Estate v. D.O.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Given the divided success on appeal and cross-appeal, the concession by the Estate on one aspect, and the comparatively small monetary significance of the contested personal award, the court exercised its discretion to order that each party bear its own costs of the appeal and cross-appeal.

Source excerpt

• Costs of appeal
• Cross-appeal
• Divided success
• Allocation of costs

Read case analysis

Royal Bank of Canada v. Everest Group Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Because none of the parties enjoyed any degree of success before this court and the appeals and cross-appeals were argued together, the court declined to parse the matters for differential costs and ordered that there be no award of costs.

Source excerpt

• Appeal
• Cross-appeal
• Costs
• Franchise dispute
• Grouped appeals

Read case analysis

RGN Management Limited Partnership v. 7th Light Education Group Inc.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal allowed 7th Light to amend its response factum and discontinue its cross-appeal, holding a cross-appeal was unnecessary to support the order on other grounds.

• Garnishing order
• Garnishment
• Quistclose trust
• Leave to amend factum
• Cross-appeal requirement
• Drafting of court orders

Read case analysis

Fowlow v. Morrison

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The Court exercised its discretion under r.14 to grant the extension because the applicant demonstrated a bona fide intention to participate, provided a reasonable excuse (issue only became apparent on receipt of the appellant's factum while unrepresented), the proposed cross-appeal has potential merit due to the trial judge's linkage of partner support and property division, and special circumstances existed (the issue surfaced only when the factum was filed); accordingly the notice of cross-appeal must be filed within 10 days and the cross-appeal factum filing deadline is advanced to June 1…

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Cross-appeal
• Partner support
• Division of property
• Costs

Read case analysis

IE CA 3 Holdings Ltd. v. NYDIG ABL LLC

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal granted NYDIG extra time to file a cross-appeal, finding the reasons below were ambiguous and that a joint hearing best served justice.

• Fraudulent conveyance
• Oppression remedy (s.227 bca)
• Substantive consolidation
• Extension of time to file cross-appeal
• Security interest in cryptocurrency/mined proceeds
• Extension-of-time

Read case analysis