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 of Canada denied substantial indemnity costs after a settlement offer was improperly copied to the Court, but awarded enhanced costs and reduced disbursements.
The Federal Court dismissed Ms. Kostic’s motion to strike Canada’s vexatious litigant application, refused her requests on affidavits and viva voce evidence, and awarded $5,000 costs.
The Tax Court Judge did not err in exercising his discretion to deny enhanced costs under Rule 147(3.1) because the appellant failed to comply with a court order and caused significant delay; appellate intervention is not warranted absent a palpable and overriding error.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court fixed costs at $675,000, finding the plaintiffs’ litigation conduct and baseless allegations justified enhanced costs rather than public-interest relief.
Tariff A was inadequate given the docketed time, complexity and conduct of defendants; the court declined solicitor-client costs because the defendants' conduct, though culpable, was not reprehensible to the necessary degree; airfare disbursement allowed; trial was unnecessarily prolonged by defendants' failure to admit negligence/breach and by an unnecessary witness; accordingly lump sum party-and-party costs of $60,000 are awarded, apportioned 75% to Daniel J. MacIsaac and DJMI Legal Services Limited and 25% to Ronald MacIsaac, with disbursements of $8,511.73 to be paid equally and prejudgm…
Source excerpt
Subsection 138(11.3) of the Income Tax Act does not trigger the deemed disposition in the first taxation year that a Canadian resident life insurer commences to carry on an insurance business in another country (nor is it intended to apply to avoid taxation for non-residents entering Canada), because Parliament specifically addressed non-resident entrants in s.138(11.91) and did not intend immediate, tax-free deemed dispositions in the first year; accordingly SCDA’s statutory interpretation was rejected and the appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court correctly struck out the appellant's judicial review application because there was no reviewable decision affecting the appellant's legal or practical interests, the remedies sought were not within the Court's power and the application could not succeed; Universities Canada was not a federal board in the circumstances alleged; the bias allegation lacked evidentiary support; costs to respondents were awarded on the usual scale (column III).
Source excerpt
The motion for enhanced costs was dismissed because the Court concluded the Minister was legally prohibited from implementing the appellant's proposed compromise under s.7(3) of the Income Tax Act; accordingly there was no obligation on the Minister to give reasons or to attempt alternative settlements and the circumstances did not justify an award of enhanced costs.
Source excerpt
Motion for enhanced costs was allowed in part: judge found appellant made a bona fide offer that matched the judgment, there was no legal impediment to acceptance, and settlement materials (excluding presiding judge's comments) could be considered; however the proposed rule could not be applied retroactively and full solicitor-client indemnity was not justified after balancing all s.147(3) factors; fixing a lump-sum award that was fair and reasonable to the respondent, the Court awarded fixed representation costs of $40,000 (inclusive of motion) in addition to applicable tariff amounts, with…
Source excerpt
Explore more
