Canada Case Law

Canadian Constitution Foundation v. Minister of Natural Resources (Nova Scotia)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The motion for public interest standing was granted because the challenge raised a serious justiciable issue, CCF demonstrated a genuine interest and was not a busybody despite being Ontario‑headquartered, and CCF has the capacity, expertise and does not pose a prejudicial duplication of judicial resources such that its suit is a reasonable and effective means of bringing the issues before the court; the existence of a parallel individual judicial review did not render CCF’s participation unnecessary or prejudicial.

Source excerpt

• Public interest standing
• Judicial review
• Charter s.7
• Vires
• Vagueness
• Overbreadth

Read case analysis

R. v. Hirny

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a criminal appeal challenging a Mental Health Act apprehension, holding the police acted lawfully on the totality of circumstances.

• Apprehension under mental health act
• Section 28 mha
• Lawful execution of duty
• Emergency powers
• Totality of circumstances
• Mental-health-act

Read case analysis

Weisenburger v. College of Naturopathic Physicians of British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck a naturopath’s civil claim as a collateral attack on administrative decisions, dismissed leave to amend, and held the pleaded Charter damages claims failed.

• Judicial review
• Collateral attack
• Abuse of process
• Charter s.2(b) freedom of expression
• Charter s.7 life liberty and security
• Charter damages

Read case analysis

N.C. v. Fraser Health Authority

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Appeal allowed. The court held the Provincial Court could not use COVID-19 measures to extend a support and assistance order, and that a mere “risk” finding did not meet the Adult Guardianship Act threshold.

• Adult guardianship act
• Support and assistance orders (sao)
• Jurisdiction
• Detention/liberty
• Mootness
• Emergency powers

Read case analysis

1033040 B.C. Ltd. v. Lumby (Village)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a motion to file a further amended claim because many proposed damages duplicated issues already within the EPA compensation process.

• Emergency powers
• State of local emergency
• Emergency program act s.19
• Community charter s.33
• Expropriation act s.41
• Trespass

Read case analysis

Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy v. Henry

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

CSASPP was granted public interest standing to challenge COVID-19 vaccination orders; Kipling Warner was denied private interest standing because he showed no personal, direct impact.

• Standing
• Judicial review
• Emergency powers
• Charter rights
• Vaccination mandates
• Reconsideration under public health act

Read case analysis

MacKay v. Brookside Campsite Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a flood-damage claim over Cache Creek, holding the defendants did not tortiously direct water onto the plaintiff’s land and the Village’s emergency acts were protected.

• Flooding
• Watercourse diversion
• Nuisance
• Rylands v fletcher
• Negligence
• Injunction

Read case analysis

Conesa v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a Fisheries Act corrective order, finding DFO acted fairly and reasonably in light of ongoing erosion risks to fish habitat.

• Procedural fairness
• Standard of review — reasonableness
• Emergency powers
• Fish habitat protection
• Remedial orders
• Procedural-fairness

Read case analysis

Ross v. Mohawk Council of Kanesatake

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court quashed the Mohawk Council’s summary dismissal of the Acting Chief of Police for breach of procedural fairness and remitted the matter for redetermination.

• Procedural fairness
• Delegation of authority
• Reinstatement
• Judicial review
• Emergency powers
• Procedural-fairness

Read case analysis

Pausche v. B.C. Hydro et al.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that s. 285 of the Local Government Act did not apply to Maple Ridge and adjourned the s. 286 notice issue and the Rule 18A application generally.

• Failure to warn
• Emergency powers
• Notice requirements
• Representative plaintiff
• Certification timing
• Municipal inspections

Read case analysis