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
Appeal allowed in a contract-damages dispute over mitigation, set-off, and lost profits after repudiation of a freezer supply contract.
Court of Appeal reviewed agency, vicarious liability, and mitigation issues in a class action about temporary foreign workers and recruitment fees.
Appeal dismissed because the evidence did not establish that the appellant was regularly incapable of substantially gainful employment and the disability was prolonged; medical opinions indicated some residual capacity and potential for improvement, the appellant failed to make reasonable efforts to pursue alternative employment, and he failed to follow recommended treatment, undermining the prolonged element.
Source excerpt
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
Judicial review dismissed in a Canada Labour Code unjust dismissal dispute. The Court upheld the adjudicator’s evidentiary rulings, no-bias findings, mitigation analysis, and functus officio finding.
Appellant repeatedly declined recommended first‑line treatments (medication and counselling) without an objectively reasonable explanation and clinicians recommended those treatments; because following that advice might have improved her anxiety and work capacity, the appellant failed to prove a severe disability by the hearing date and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Appellant failed to prove a severe disability by the MQP (Dec 31, 2015); most disabling conditions (seizure disorder, brain injury, esophageal cancer) have onset after 2015 and cannot be considered, and pre‑2015 medical evidence only substantiated scleroderma which produced hand limitations but did not prevent all substantially gainful work given vocational factors and employment history, therefore appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
The contractor breached the implied term under the Consumer Protection Act by performing window installations that failed to follow manufacturer instructions (no shimming, improper sealing, wrong sizing), thereby voiding warranties; the Claimants acted reasonably in refusing further payments and in not permitting remediation; accordingly Claimants are entitled to monetary relief for the deficient work and related costs.
Source excerpt
The court found the 2014 rollover accident caused ongoing right hip pain and psychological injury, rejected the mitigation defence, and awarded $910,518 in damages.
The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge’s unchallenged and well‑supported factual findings — notably adverse credibility and reliability assessments of the appellant and the finding that the business closure resulted from a breakdown in the father‑son relationship rather than the accident — negated causation for lost income and diminished earning capacity; alternatively the judge correctly found failure to mitigate. No error of law or demonstrable basis for appellate interference was shown.
Source excerpt
Explore more
