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 court struck the defendant’s response for repeated non-compliance, abuse of process, and breach of an injunction, and entered default judgment for the plaintiffs.
The court partially struck the defence for disclosure non-compliance and granted limited summary relief on the Hudson Street sale proceeds, preserving set-off issues and leaving damages to be assessed.
The court found the seller repudiated a real estate contract by failing to provide an occupancy permit and clear title. The buyer was entitled to return of the $1 million deposit and special costs.
The court dismissed a summary judgment application in an unjust enrichment claim, finding triable issues about use of alleged misappropriated funds and discovery compliance.
The appellants' motions were dismissed because the asserted torture, Bill of Rights and UDHR grounds do not excuse non-compliance with discovery obligations and lack merit; summary judgment was inappropriate and not warranted; given related orders and appeals pending before the Federal Court of Appeal (McCarthy matters), the appropriate remedy was to adjourn these appeals sine die and require status reports while reserving costs.
Source excerpt
Costs ruling in a defamation action: special costs were awarded against three defendants for discovery abuse and malicious allegations, and a Sanderson order was made for successful defendants.
The appellants' persistent, inappropriate litigation conduct, repeated failure to obey court orders and multiple unpaid costs awards constitute "special circumstances" under Rule 90.42 justifying an order for security for costs despite appellants' asserted impecuniosity; security was fixed at $4,000 (approx. 40% of estimated costs) and must be posted by July 31, 2013 or the appeal will be dismissed.
Source excerpt
The court treated the respondent’s Korean assets as family assets, ordered compensation to equalize division, imputed income for support, and refused permission to take the son to Korea.
The motions judge did not err in principle or exercise of discretion in striking the appellant's pleadings and ordering an uncontested trial after ongoing non-compliance with disclosure orders; the judge considered lesser remedies and reasonably concluded they were inappropriate, and custody/access authorities relied on by the appellant were inapplicable.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed Rodica Balaj’s application for indigent status on appeal, finding the appeal had no merit or prospect of success.
Explore more
