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 court granted a defence application under Rule 7-6 for a vocational assessment, finding the proposed evidence necessary and proportionate despite some overlap with prior experts.
The court allowed physiatry and ENT IMEs, but adjourned a neurology IME because the defendant had not yet shown it was necessary rather than duplicative.
The Court held that Senator Duffy's claims fall within established federal parliamentary privileges — discipline of members, administration of internal affairs (including allocation of parliamentary funds), parliamentary proceedings, and freedom of speech — and therefore the courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate his civil claims against the Senate; the Senate did not waive privilege by referring matters to the RCMP; Charter challenges must be pursued before the Senate; appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
The court clarified its earlier ruling on sworn statements, confirming Wesley Modeste’s affidavit met threshold necessity and reliability, while Mabel Mitchell’s did not.
Board decisions determining the proper use of parliamentary funds by Members fall within established categories of parliamentary privilege (proceedings in Parliament, internal affairs and discipline) originating in s.18 of the Constitution Act and the Parliament of Canada Act; therefore the Federal Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the judicial review applications and the applications must be struck.
Source excerpt
Although the applicant lacks financial means, appointment of counsel was denied because the appeal issues are largely factual and manageable, some grounds are weak or unlikely to succeed, the record is short and focused, the LAO opinion and Crown representation permit fair adjudication, and the applicant failed to demonstrate he cannot effectively advance his grounds without counsel; therefore appointment under s.684 is not necessary in the interests of justice.
Source excerpt
The court ordered limited non-party document production in a defamation case, rejected parliamentary and Wigmore privilege claims, and adjourned non-party examinations.
The applications judge erred by subordinating the Mechanics' Lien Act's gate-keeping necessity requirement to the general Rule 12 joinder test; he failed to explain why each proposed third party was necessary to the summary and least-expense disposition mandated by the Act. The order adding six third parties was set aside.
Source excerpt
The motion to add the Commissioner as a party was denied because the necessity test for joinder was not met: the Commissioner had been granted full intervener status at trial and has not shown that being a party on appeal was necessary to bind him or to allow the Court to effectually and completely adjudicate the issues; however, with Air Canada's consent the Commissioner was granted intervener rights on appeal including filing a memorandum, making representations and the right to appeal this Court's decisions.
Source excerpt
Leave to intervene was denied because, applying the two-step test (threshold for leave and necessity), the Cross-Applicant's proposed role and plan were redundant to the mother's plan, the presence of the Cross-Applicant as a party was not necessary to determine the matters in issue under Rule 21.08(8), and adding her was not in the child's best interests given the risk factors and potential for complicating proceedings.
Source excerpt
Explore more
