Canada Case Law

R. v. Crawford

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal was denied because, although questions of law were raised, they lack importance beyond this case and lack a reasonable prospect of success: the Bylaw regulates non-incidental commercial vehicle parking rather than the conduct of farm businesses and therefore does not fall within ss.481(2) or 552 LGA requiring ministerial approval, and it is not inconsistent with the ALCA in a way that would alter the appellants' convictions.

Source excerpt

• Ultra vires
• Bylaw validity
• Paramountcy
• Ministerial approval
• Leave to appeal test
• Ejusdem generis

Read case analysis

Wilding v. Salt Spring Island Local Trust Committee

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The petition is dismissed because the SSILTC reasonably concluded development permits were required and reasonably applied its OCP guidelines in refusing the permits; the DFO letter did not legally exempt the Project from permits; the SSILTC had authority to regulate land including intertidal areas and the doctrines of interjurisdictional immunity and paramountcy did not render the guidelines inapplicable; the reconsideration hearing met the required standard of fairness. Parties to bear their own costs.

Source excerpt

• Development permits
• Delegation of authority
• Standard of review (reasonableness)
• Division of powers
• Interjurisdictional immunity
• Paramountcy

Read case analysis

Liberal Party of Canada v. The Complainants

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judicial review of an OIPC ruling held that BC privacy law applies to federal political parties, and found no paramountcy, immunity, or fairness breach.

• Paramountcy
• Interjurisdictional immunity
• Privacy statutes
• Judicial review
• Cooperative federalism
• Canada elections act amendments

Read case analysis

Atlantic Sea Cucumber Ltd. v. Weihai Taiwei Haiyang Aquatic Food Co. Ltd.

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

Section 13 of the CCAA applied because the conversion application and resulting decision were made under the CCAA; Atlantic Sea failed to seek leave under s.13 so the appeal must be dismissed. Alternatively, if leave were assumed, the applications judge did not err in law or palpably and overridingly in fact in declining to abridge the ten‑day filing and service rule: there is no operational conflict between the CCAA and the provincial Civil Procedure Rules, the judge properly exercised his discretion considering prejudice to WTH, and his ruling did not cause a patent injustice.

Source excerpt

• Ccaa conversion
• Abridgement of time
• Leave to appeal
• Paramountcy
• Judicial discretion

Read case analysis

Halton (Regional Municipality) v. Canadian National Railway Company

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The application judge’s discretionary denial of sweeping declaratory and injunctive relief was upheld: Halton failed to establish a sufficient fact-specific record showing live controversies for the majority of the listed local laws; for three bylaws the judge correctly applied interjurisdictional immunity because the permitting regime required official plan amendments granting municipalities broad discretion (and lengthy delay) that would substantially impair the core federal power to locate, construct and operate an interprovincial railway undertaking; appeal dismissed and leave to appeal t…

Source excerpt

• Interjurisdictional immunity
• Paramountcy
• Declaratory relief
• Injunction
• Cooperative federalism
• Division of powers

Read case analysis

Pacific Wild Alliance v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted Pacific Wild Alliance public interest standing, but dismissed its challenge to the wolf-cull permitting scheme and refused speculative relief about future permits.

• Public interest standing
• Delegation of legislative power
• Ultra vires
• Paramountcy doctrine
• Statutory interpretation
• Wildlife management

Read case analysis

Nelson v. TELUS Communications Inc.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge correctly concluded that the WSAA was valid provincial legislation within provincial jurisdiction and was not rendered inoperative by federal paramountcy or interjurisdictional immunity; accordingly the Superior Court had jurisdiction and the class action was not to be stayed.

Source excerpt

• Division of powers
• Paramountcy
• Interjurisdictional immunity
• Validity of provincial legislation
• Refunds under provincial statute

Read case analysis

1074022 B.C. Ltd. v. Li

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The Court held that excess funds from a foreclosure sale were still subject to the sale order’s priorities and could be paid to the mortgagor’s lawyer in trust.

• S.116 income tax act
• Vesting order
• Priority of secured creditors
• Paramountcy
• Trust payments
• Remittance of non-resident tax holdback

Read case analysis

Buechler v. Island Crisis Care Society

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The Court held B.C. Housing was a user of the lands for s. 14(2) of the Interpretation Act; alternatively, ICCS could rely on Crown immunity while operating Newcastle Place.

• Crown immunity
• Interpretation act s.14(2)
• Zoning bylaws
• Paramountcy
• Third-party contractors
• Supportive housing

Read case analysis

Business Development Bank of Canada v. Astoria Organic Matters Ltd.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Where a receivership order and the leave-to-sue provision were made pursuant to powers conferred by s.243(1) of the BIA, the appeal route is governed by the BIA; s.243(1) necessarily implies authority to include leave-to-sue terms and federal paramountcy prevents reliance on the CJA appeal route where the regimes conflict.

Source excerpt

• Receivership
• Leave to sue provision
• Appeal route and time limits
• Paramountcy
• Statutory interpretation

Read case analysis