Canada Case Law

A.T. v A.S.

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Application dismissed because, even without conclusively determining prima facie distribution to counsel, the respondent successfully invoked the s.7(1) public interest defence for sharing the text messages with his lawyer in the solicitor-client context (limited 'small icon'), and the affidavit reference did not itself distribute an intimate image; court lacks authority to grant Criminal Code relief.

Source excerpt

• Distribution of intimate images
• Public interest defence
• Solicitor-client privilege
• Absolute privilege
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Publication ban

Read case analysis

Canada Employment Insurance Commission v XY

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The appeal is dismissed because the Commission failed to show the General Division made an error of law or an important error of fact; the General Division stated and applied the correct legal test for antedating, reasonably found that the claimant's cumulative circumstances amounted to exceptional circumstances explaining the delay, and the Appeal Division must defer to the General Division's findings of fact and cannot reweigh the evidence.

Source excerpt

• Employment insurance
• Antedating claims
• Procedural fairness
• Bias
• Evidentiary admissibility

Read case analysis

Mayer v. Merchant Law Group LLP

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Class certification granted, subject to amendments, in a proposed class action alleging Merchant Law Group misused $500 retainers and made pay-to-play misrepresentations.

• Breach of trust
• Fiduciary duty of lawyers
• Negligent misrepresentation
• Fraudulent misrepresentation (deceit)
• Equitable fraud
• Contingent fee agreements

Read case analysis

Mera Lopez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court granted a stay of removal to Mexico, finding a serious issue, irreparable harm, and balance of convenience under the Toth test.

• Pre-removal risk assessment (prra)
• Stay of removal
• Irreparable harm
• Balance of convenience
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Domestic violence

Read case analysis

RA v Minister of Employment and Social Development

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

Res judicata confined the relevant period to October 21–December 31, 2005 (the Window); there is no persuasive contemporaneous medical or functional evidence showing a deterioration in the claimant’s work capacity during that Window and treating physician statements relied on were either consistent with pre‑Window conditions or given many years later and thus entitled to limited weight; on the balance of probabilities the claimant did not begin to have a severe disability in the Window, so the appeal fails.

Source excerpt

• Disability pension eligibility
• Severe and prolonged disability
• Res judicata
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Weight of medical evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. Tabanao

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge’s factual findings that the appellant exhibited a prolonged pattern of inattention (including repeated throttle loading and failing to brake while cruise control was engaged), together with visible cues and the appellant’s own statements linking a prior similar incident, support a conviction for criminal negligence causing death and bodily harm; however the original seven year global sentence was demonstrably unfit because the sentencing judge overemphasized denunciation and deterrence relative to the appellant’s mitigating factors, warranting reduction to five years.

Source excerpt

• Criminal negligence
• Dangerous driving
• Mens rea
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Sentence fit and reduction
• Appellate review

Read case analysis

Madison Pacific Properties Inc. v. The King

Court

Tax Court of Canada

Given the respondent's complete success, the complexity of GAAR and factual issues, the significant trial time caused by the appellant's refusal to concede a central issue (tax purpose), and comparative precedent, the court exercised its discretion under s.147(3) to fix costs at 35% of the respondent's actual legal fees ($408,833.77) and to allow total disbursements of $43,740.96 including the $19,680 expert fee as reasonable.

Source excerpt

• General anti-avoidance rule (gaar)
• Costs
• Disbursements
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Loss trading

Read case analysis

Rafuse v. Ayaz

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant's affidavit did not meet the exceptional standard to admit fresh evidence on appeal, there was no jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice, and the adjudicator's evidentiary rulings and credibility and factual findings were within his discretion and supported by the record; the adjudicator's rent abatement and setoff determinations were reasonable and not palpably wrong.

Source excerpt

• Rent abatement
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Fresh evidence on appeal
• Natural justice
• Hearsay
• Credibility findings

Read case analysis

Queen Elizabeth Annex (QEA) Parents’ Society v. Vancouver School District No. 39

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On judicial review, the court largely refused to strike affidavit evidence about the closure of Queen Elizabeth Annex School, finding it potentially relevant to bad faith and fairness issues.

• Judicial review
• Procedural fairness
• Natural justice
• Bad faith
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Injunctions

Read case analysis

Rodriguez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a refugee appeal decision, finding no reviewable error in the RAD’s conclusion that counsel incompetence and prejudice were not established.

• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Procedural fairness
• Internal flight alternative
• Standard of review
• Evidentiary admissibility
• Ineffective-assistance-of-counsel

Read case analysis