Canada Case Law

Rogers Communications Canada Inc. v. Timeless Inc.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Commission's remedy ordering staff‑assisted mediation and, if unsuccessful, final offer arbitration was a reasonable, discretionary response to an undue preference finding; its reasons were adequate when read in context, Rogers waived its complaint about new evidence, and claims that the Commission lacked power or was functus officio were either not raised below or unpersuasive; appeal and judicial review are dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Undue preference
• Remedies
• Alternative dispute resolution
• Judicial review
• Reasons for decision
• Functus officio

Read case analysis

Oleynik v. Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed: the Court held the appeal judge did not err — case management ordered without oral argument did not breach procedural fairness given inherent jurisdiction and rules; additional evidence was irrelevant and not admitted; no reasonable apprehension of bias or conflict established; the record was complete; amendments made were limited to clerical corrections; no palpable and overriding errors were shown. Costs awarded to respondent under Column 3.

Source excerpt

• Procedural fairness
• Conflict of interest
• Admission of additional evidence
• Case management
• Functus officio
• Duty of good faith

Read case analysis

R (H.C.) v. Ontario Special Education Tribunal

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal dismissed a motion for reconsideration as moot after the Divisional Court granted anonymization and a publication ban.

• Mootness
• Publication ban
• Anonymization
• Stay of proceedings
• Judicial review
• Recusal

Read case analysis

Richards vs Correctional Service Canada

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal allowed CSC’s request to seal exhibit R-523, placing a redacted version on the record and keeping the unredacted exhibit confidential after the complaints were dismissed.

• Confidentiality order
• Sealing and redaction of exhibits
• Functus officio
• Public access to hearings
• Safety and security of inmates
• Procedural fairness

Read case analysis

R. v. Toole

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal held that a trial judge was not functus officio for a post-verdict s. 11(b) application and dismissed the Crown’s appeal.

• S.11(b) right to be tried within a reasonable time
• Stay of proceedings
• Functus officio
• Jordan delay framework
• Exceptional circumstances (discrete events vs complexity)
• Adjournment to await higher court decision

Read case analysis

McIntosh v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed a motion seeking clarification of earlier reasons, holding the Court was functus officio and that the Rules do not provide a free-standing clarification remedy.

• Functus officio
• Clarification of judgment
• Federal courts rules (motions and costs)
• Collateral attack
• Functus-officio
• Clarification-of-judgment

Read case analysis

P.R.C. v. C.K.C.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

알 수 없는

• Reopening appeal
• Fresh evidence
• Functus officio
• Miscarriage of justice
• Excluded property
• Damages

Read case analysis

Owners of Strata Plan NW 2301 v. Owners of Strata Plan NW 2364

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Appeal dismissed. The Court of Appeal upheld an amended order adding liberty to apply for further remedial orders arising from a prior liability finding.

• Covenant under land title act
• Post-incorporation contract
• Amendment of entered order
• Liberty to apply for further orders
• Functus officio
• Remedial quantification

Read case analysis

Oram's Enterprises Limited v. The King

Court

Tax Court of Canada

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed a Rule 172(1) application to amend a consent judgment, holding the court had already adjudicated the small business deduction amounts.

• Small business deduction
• Consent judgment
• Amendment of judgment
• Functus officio
• Tax court of canada rules s.172(1)
• Tax-procedure

Read case analysis

Noble v. Synergy Credit Union Ltd.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court ordered the self-represented applicant to pay the respondent $500 in lump sum costs, after weighing Rule 400(3) factors and both parties’ conduct.

• Pipeda s.14
• Federal courts rules rule 400(3)
• Tariff b costs assessment
• Self-represented litigants
• Functus officio
• Costs

Read case analysis