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 allowed Erick Krist’s appeal from the Ontario Review Board and ordered an absolute discharge, finding the significant-threat conclusion unsupported by the evidence.
Appeal dismissed because the trial judge's factual findings and discretionary property and parenting orders were supported by evidence and correct application of law; discretionary decisions were entitled to deference; statutory constraints on departing from equal division were properly applied; the dog award complied with s.97(4.2); and the proposed additional evidence failed the Palmer test and would not have altered the result.
Source excerpt
Leave to appeal was granted but the appeal was dismissed because the sentencing judge did not err in principle in evaluating the appellant's late-stage cooperation, the six-month reduction was a permissible exercise of discretion given the uncertainty and absence of actionable results at sentencing, and the resulting 42-month sentence is not demonstrably unfit.
Source excerpt
The Court concluded the trial judge correctly applied the law, made fact findings amply supported by the record, permissibly admitted and relied on the Crown's expert and institutional evidence, reasonably found a pattern of repetitive and persistent violent behaviour and intractability (unable to surmount), and reasonably imposed an indeterminate sentence because there was no evidence of meaningful treatment within an ascertainable timeframe to protect the public; the appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish error of law, palpable and overriding factual error, or an unreasonable exercise of discretion; the trial judge’s travel, chaperone and cost allocation measures were within her jurisdiction and justified by the parties’ history and the children’s best interests; no reasonable apprehension of bias was shown.
Source excerpt
Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal over a claimed beneficial interest in a property, but varied costs because the respondents were not wholly successful.
Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an estate-related appeal, holding the handwritten 2014 document was properly read as testamentary only in part and that no palpable error was shown.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal in a legal malpractice action, finding the claim was statute-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002.
Imputing income to a payor requires first considering whether the payor's voluntary reduction in hours and income was reasonable in light of age, health and work availability; failure to assess that reasonableness is an error of law justifying appellate intervention. Here entitlement to ongoing spousal support was affirmed but the imputed income was unsupported and was replaced by an assessed income of $310,000, producing monthly support of $5,224 effective January 1, 2025.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because the Adjudicator's factual findings were supported by the evidentiary record and there was no error of law or breach of natural justice; the appellants merely sought a re‑weighing of evidence, which is not available on appeal under s.32(1) of the Small Claims Court Act, and therefore the Adjudicator's award in favour of the tenants ($1,337.42) and costs ($50) is affirmed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
