Canada Case Law

FH Development Group Inc. v. New Bright Homes Limited

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Applicant failed to establish a building scheme because covenants were not uniform, lacked reciprocity, did not show intent to benefit all lots, and expressly granted the developer unilateral waiver power; the covenants do not identify a dominant tenement and do not expressly prohibit subdivision, so subdivision was not a breach; estoppel by convention was not established because there was no shared assumption that subdivision was barred and no proven detrimental reliance; the Respondent's interference claim failed for lack of reliable evidence of causation and provable damages. According…

Source excerpt

• Building scheme
• Restrictive covenants
• Estoppel by convention
• Dominant tenement
• Interference with contractual relations
• Land registration act s.61

Read case analysis

Geophysical Services Incorporated v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Summary judgment granted for defendants on claims of unlawful interference with economic relations/unlawful means, interference with contractual relations, negligent infliction of economic loss, and unjust enrichment because essential elements of those causes of action were absent on the evidence (no act actionable against a third party for unlawful means; no contract between plaintiff and government for interference with contractual relations; no duty/proximity for negligence; no enrichment/juristic reason for unjust enrichment). Claims for misfeasance in public office and conspiracy were no…

Source excerpt

• Misfeasance in public office
• Unlawful means/unlawful interference with economic relations
• Conspiracy
• Interference with contractual relations
• Negligent infliction of economic loss (pure economic loss/duty of care)
• Unjust enrichment

Read case analysis

Johnston v. Rykon Construction Management Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck an overly prolix amended notice of civil claim for failing to plead material facts concisely, but granted leave to seek amendment within 30 days.

• Pleadings
• Striking pleadings
• Civil conspiracy
• Negligence
• Interference with contractual relations
• Nuisance

Read case analysis

Alan G.S. Hultman Personal Law Corporation v. Terrace on 7th Development Corporation

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court converted a petition into an action because material factual and legal disputes required a trial, including the nature of a Trust Declaration and competing interests.

• Declaration of beneficial interest
• Conversion of petition to action
• Priority of security interests
• Trust vs loan characterization
• Undisclosed trust
• Interference with contractual relations

Read case analysis

S.N.S Industrial Products Limited v. Omron Canada Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge correctly concluded there was no genuine issue for trial: the distribution agreement was validly terminated for cause under its express terms based on the appellant's conduct, allegations of misuse of confidential information and interference were unsupported by evidence, the appellant failed to challenge the counterclaim, and the fresh evidence did not meet the Palmer test.

Source excerpt

• Summary judgment
• Termination for cause
• Anticipatory breach
• Confidential information
• Interference with contractual relations
• Costs

Read case analysis

Geophysical Service Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The motions for summary judgment on the pleadings were dismissed because, assuming the pleaded facts to be true, there are substantive, non-frivolous, triable issues as to whether the Coasting Trade Act applies (including whether the DFO exception was engaged) and whether the pleaded facts can support the intentional torts and negligence claims; the pleadings are not plainly or obviously unsustainable.

Source excerpt

• Coasting trade act
• Statutory interpretation
• Misfeasance in public office
• Conspiracy
• Interference with contractual relations
• Negligent infliction of economic loss

Read case analysis

Donaldson Travel Inc. v. Murphy

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion judge correctly interpreted the restrictive covenant as a non-competition clause (driven by the phrase "or accept business"); because it contained no temporal limitation it was unreasonable and unenforceable; the appellant failed to prove that any disclosed information had the requisite quality of confidence or that solicitation occurred; accordingly summary dismissal of the appellant's claims was correct and leave to appeal the costs award was denied.

Source excerpt

• Non-competition clause
• Non-solicitation clause
• Misappropriation of confidential information
• Summary judgment procedure
• Severability of restrictive covenants
• Inducing breach of contract

Read case analysis

Buchanan v. Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed the plaintiff’s applications, declined to disqualify defence counsel, refused joinder of proposed defendants, and granted the defendants’ cross-application to strike claims against the personal defendants.

• Joint retainer/conflict of interest
• Removal/striking of parties (rule 9-5)
• Joinder of parties (rule 6-2(7))
• Interference with contractual relations
• Civil conspiracy
• Section 36 competition act claims

Read case analysis

Kiani v. Smith

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The claim was struck because the pleaded conduct of counsel in foreign litigation did not give rise to a legally cognizable duty or cause of action in Ontario, objections to conduct in Texas must be raised in Texas courts, the pleaded torts and interference claims were not actionable on the facts alleged, and there was no basis to grant leave to amend or to require recusal of the motion judge.

Source excerpt

• Rule 21 no cause of action
• Duty of counsel
• Intentional infliction of harm
• Conspiracy
• Interference with contractual relations
• Implied undertaking rule

Read case analysis

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC v. Gold

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted Trans Mountain an interlocutory injunction after finding jurisdiction, rejecting prematurity, and holding the evidence showed a strong prima facie case and irreparable harm.

• Concurrent jurisdiction
• Exclusive jurisdiction of tribunal
• Trespass
• Nuisance
• Assault and intimidation
• Interference with contractual relations

Read case analysis