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 application to adjourn was dismissed because the defendants’ request was untimely, the prejudice to the plaintiff from delay (financial hardship, loss of income, reliance on prepared experts and readiness to proceed) outweighed the defendants’ preference for a jury, and the court concluded a fair trial can be held by a judge alone despite the FIFA scheduling notice.
Source excerpt
The appeal is allowed and a new trial ordered because the trial judge’s reasons for discharging the jury were inadequate: they did not identify which comments were prejudicial or explain why corrective instructions would not cure the prejudice, preventing meaningful appellate review and unjustifiably depriving the appellants of their fundamental right to a jury trial.
Source excerpt
The Court Martial Appeal Court held that Bill C-25’s amendment to s. 70 of the National Defence Act did not apply retrospectively to pre-1999 sexual assaults.
The court struck the defendants’ jury notice so a personal injury trial could proceed as scheduled, finding the delay and prejudice from adjournment outweighed the jury right.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that s. 130(1)(a) of the National Defence Act does not violate s. 11(f) of the Charter when serious civil offences are tried as service offences.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the appellant was not entitled to a jury trial under s. 11(f) of the Charter for Alberta Securities Act offences.
The court refused to strike a jury notice in a multi-accident personal injury action, but allowed five overseas witnesses to testify by videoconference.
Because the Crown elected to proceed by indictment, the appellant was informed of and waived his right to a jury trial, and the guilty plea was entered after a full plea inquiry, there was no basis to interfere with the convictions; the appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The court refused plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment on the pleadings and on evidence and dismissed the abuse of process and conversion-to-application motions because the defence disclosed a legitimate basis and material facts were in dispute; delay and use of FOIPOP material did not amount to abuse; the action should remain as an action to preserve jury rights and permit fuller discovery; the court ordered resumption of discovery and compelled plaintiffs to answer specified lines of questioning and to produce specified documents (EHS calls, RCMP files for 2004–2006, certain medical/nat…
Source excerpt
The Rules of Court (including Rule 57.12) validly operate subject to s.34 and expressly exclude jury trial for actions under $100,000; Rule 58.02 permits a judge to convert a jury trial to judge alone where proportionality, together with the other criteria, shows a jury trial would be out of proportion to the interests at stake; on the facts (no intangible interests, claim under $100,000, simplified liability and damages evidence, and ability to try the matter in fewer days) the motion to remove the jury succeeds.
Source excerpt
Explore more
