Canada Case Law

MH v Minister of Employment and Social Development

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

Claimant failed to prove a severe and prolonged disability during the narrow MQP (Jan 1–Feb 29, 1988); objective medical evidence from that period is absent, later medical opinion was unreliable on the critical timing, and extensive post-1988 work activity (including multi-year seasonal full-time work with satisfactory performance and EI receipts) demonstrates residual work capacity inconsistent with a continuous severe disability since 1988, therefore appeal dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Disability pension
• Minimum qualifying period (mqp)
• Onset of disability
• Severity and prolongation
• Work capacity
• Evidence and credibility

Read case analysis

R. v. Zaki

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the conviction and sentence appeals in a sexual assault case, upholding the trial judge’s credibility findings, sentence, and SOIRA order.

• Sexual assault
• Evidence and credibility
• Sentencing
• Soira (sex offender registry)
• Conditional sentence
• Constitutional challenge

Read case analysis

Pierre c. Le Roi

Court

Tax Court of Canada

La Cour canadienne de l’impôt accueille en partie l’appel de M. Pierre et de sa société, ajuste plusieurs déductions et renvoie les cotisations au ministre pour nouvelle cotisation.

• Deductibility of interest
• Shareholder benefits (s.15)
• Management fees
• Business income (s.9)
• Rental income
• Vehicle expenses

Read case analysis

Stajcer v. Evans

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held the children were habitually resident in Arizona, found no basis for parens patriae relief, and dismissed the BC family action for want of jurisdiction.

• Habitual residence
• Forum non conveniens
• Parens patriae
• Recognition and enforcement of foreign orders
• Hague convention
• Non‑removal orders

Read case analysis

McGrath v Jones

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

On balance of probabilities the children’s best interests required primary residence with the mother and final decision‑making for major issues vested in the mother (with specified exceptions), because the parties’ long history of high conflict, substantiated child‑protection concerns and practical deficiencies in the father’s childcare plan (distance, unpredictable work hours, lack of reliable third‑party exchanges) made joint custody or week‑on/week‑off shared care likely to expose the children to ongoing conflict and instability. The father was granted regular parenting time (every second…

Source excerpt

• Parenting time
• Decision-making authority
• Child support income determination
• Section 7 expenses / health benefits
• Third-party exchanges and undertakings
• Evidence and credibility

Read case analysis

Le v. Card

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judicial review of an RTB decision was allowed where the court found the arbitrator's adverse findings unsupported by the evidence and irrational.

• S.49(3) landlord or close family occupation
• S.51(2) compensation
• Standard of review - patent unreasonableness
• Evidence and credibility
• Remedies - setting aside and non‑remittance
• Residential-tenancy

Read case analysis

R. v. Dermody

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Court found the Crown proved identity, intentional application of force and bodily harm beyond a reasonable doubt. The defence of self‑defence possessed an air of reality and could justify the initial blows, but the accused exceeded defensive necessity in the second phase (re‑engaging after the complainant was non‑threatening and bent over), making subsequent force unreasonable and disproportionate; therefore the Crown disproved self‑defence for the latter portion and convicted under s.267(b).

Source excerpt

• Assault causing bodily harm
• Self-defence
• Use of force
• Evidence and credibility
• Video surveillance evidence

Read case analysis

R v Lutz

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Daniel Lutz committed choking contrary to s.267(c) of the Criminal Code. The complainant and his wife were found credible and their accounts were corroborated by admissible photographs showing neck bruising; the cousin's evidence was unreliable for the critical ground‑level events. At the time the choking occurred the complainant posed no imminent threat, so self‑defence failed on the reasonableness element and the Crown satisfied the requirement to disprove self‑defence.

Source excerpt

• Self‑defence
• Assault
• Choking (s.267(c) criminal code)
• Evidence and credibility
• Burden of proof
• W.d. rule

Read case analysis

1048547 ONTARIO INC. v. FROMFROID S.A.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court of Appeal held that the trial judge’s factual findings and inferences based on circumstantial evidence that the cooling cells were built before patent expiry were not palpably and overridingly erroneous; the trial judge reasonably concluded that the appellant engaged in conduct intended to mislead the court warranting punitive damages and correctly calculated compensatory damages using Fromfroid’s latest proposal, so the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Infringement
• Punitive damages
• Compensatory damages
• Evidence and credibility
• Presumptions of fact

Read case analysis

MH v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and X

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

Leave to appeal was refused because the Claimant did not establish an arguable case that the General Division made any legal or important factual errors or failed to follow a fair process; the General Division correctly stated and applied the law on misconduct, its findings are supported by the evidence, and the Claimant received the tribunal documents and opportunity to respond, so the appeal has no reasonable chance of success.

Source excerpt

• Misconduct
• Procedural fairness
• Standard of review
• Evidence and credibility

Read case analysis