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 Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Brandon Aubin’s appeal, finding no prejudice from trial counsel’s failure to retain an expert on fire origin.
Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an IRCC refusal of a permanent residence application as incomplete, finding the officer reasonably relied on the application record.
On appeal from sexual assault and bail-breach convictions, the court dismissed the ineffective-assistance challenge, but corrected a pretrial credit error and granted 13 additional days.
Appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that counsel's conduct caused prejudice or rendered the trial unfair to the extent required to establish a miscarriage of justice; the late disclosure of the 15‑minute audio was a breach but did not create a reasonable probability of a different or unfair outcome; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a PRRA refusal, finding no proved solicitor-client relationship and no clear evidence of ineffective assistance.
The court granted the extension because the applicant demonstrated a bona fide intention to appeal, the Crown would not suffer undue prejudice from the delay, there is arguable merit to an appeal based on ineffective assistance of appointed counsel that could amount to a miscarriage of justice, and the interests of justice (including serious collateral immigration consequences) outweigh finality; accordingly time to appeal is extended to November 21, 2025.
Source excerpt
On the evidence, including the plea transcript and former counsel's affidavit, the accused failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that his pleas were involuntary, uninformed or equivocal; the medical evidence did not establish cognitive impairment on the plea date; former counsel's conduct was within reasonable professional standards; therefore the application to withdraw guilty pleas is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Although the appellant meets the financial criteria and would benefit from counsel, the application for a s.684(1) appointment is dismissed because the appeal has no realistic prospect of success: the trial judge's voluntariness and identity findings are supported by the record and attract deference, Legal Aid and an independent counsel review found no arguable basis, and no legal or factual error sufficient to justify appointment was established.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge properly applied the W.D. credibility framework and his findings—that the appellant intentionally applied force by raising his elbow causing the complainant to be propelled backwards—are supported by the evidence (including the accused's own testimony); there was no reasonable apprehension of bias, no improper reliance on unadvanced theories, no prejudicial disclosure failure, and no ineffective assistance that caused a miscarriage of justice.
Source excerpt
Article 13(b) was correctly interpreted to include, as an independent category subject to the Convention's high threshold, an "otherwise intolerable situation"; the chambers judge reasonably found that returning the child to Mexico would place the child in an otherwise intolerable situation because the primary caregiver would face no housing, no means of financial support and no prospect of earning sufficient income, and the appellant could not be relied upon to provide support; the appellant's ineffective assistance and fresh evidence claims fail because he did not produce former counsel com…
Source excerpt
Explore more
