Canada Case Law

Royal Bank of Canada v. MacIntyre

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court set aside the RBC and BDC third party notices under Rule 3-5(8) because they failed to plead facts establishing any entitlement to contribution/indemnity or other connection to the narrow debt claims and would massively and prejudicially expand straightforward debt litigation into broad public law and Charter inquiries; the MacIntyre NOCC was struck under Rule 9-5(1)(a) against AGC and the Province because, assuming pleaded facts true, it was plain and obvious the claims had no reasonable prospect of success given lack of pleaded proximity/duty, statutory immunity (PHA s.92), failur…

Source excerpt

• Third party notice
• Misfeasance in public office
• Negligence
• Statutory immunity
• Charter damages
• Striking pleadings

Read case analysis

Galang v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Parts 1 and 3 of the Further Amended Notice of Civil Claim were struck out with leave to amend because the pleadings contained substantial amounts of evidence and unnecessary material and failed to concisely plead material facts and the specific elements required to meet statutory immunities and vicarious liability issues; summary judgment was denied because affidavit evidence was inadequate, hearsay concerns and disputed records created genuine issues for trial; security for costs was denied because plaintiff's impecuniosity and steps taken to address finances made an order disproportionate…

Source excerpt

• Striking pleadings
• Summary judgment
• Security for costs
• Vicarious liability
• Statutory immunity
• Mental health act detention

Read case analysis

Dwyer v. Interior Health Authority

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that claims brought on behalf of the deceased for non-pecuniary loss are barred by WESA and therefore those portions of the NOCC must be struck; conversely, it is not plain and obvious that Mr. Dwyer's personal claims — including as substitute decision-maker and for negligent infliction of mental distress related to the defendants' alleged failure to respect an advance directive and MRA — have no prospect of success, so those claims may proceed and the plaintiff is granted leave to amend; the Rule 9-6 summary dismissal application was refused as premature pending amendment.

Source excerpt

• Duty of care
• Negligence
• Advance directives
• Representation agreements
• Palliative care
• Summary judgment

Read case analysis

Hogg v. College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Amended Statement of Claim is plain and obviously unsustainable: named committees are not legal entities; section 100 of the Paramedics Act grants statutory immunity that, on the pleaded facts, bars claims against the College Defendants; the Lawyer Defendants owed duties to their client and the ASOC fails to plead material facts necessary to sustain the alleged torts against them; summary judgment is warranted unless plaintiff is permitted to amend and does so by the court deadline.

Source excerpt

• Statutory immunity
• Summary judgment on pleadings
• Misfeasance in public office
• Defamation
• Intrusion upon seclusion
• Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Read case analysis

Choi v. Nabeel

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Section 332 of the Workers Compensation Act bars actions against WorkSafeBC and its employees in respect of acts or omissions within or believed within the Board's jurisdiction; the pleaded allegations arise from the Board's adjudicative/quasi-judicial functions and therefore no private law duty of care or Charter damages remedy is available and Human Rights Code remedies are exclusive to the Tribunal; accordingly the amended notice of civil claim discloses no reasonable cause and is struck without leave to amend.

Source excerpt

• Statutory immunity
• Judicial review
• Failure to accommodate
• Quasi-judicial functions
• Charter damages
• Motion to strike (no reasonable cause)

Read case analysis

Cimolai v. Halpenny

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck Dr. Cimolai’s claim against Dr. Halpenny as an abuse of process, finding it was a collateral attack on final Commission orders.

• Abuse of process
• Collateral attack
• Statutory immunity
• Limitation period
• Summary judgment
• Judicial review alternatives

Read case analysis

Afridi v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court denied leave to file a second amended claim and struck the action without leave, finding the pleading prolix, confusing, time-barred in part, and an abuse of process.

• Amendment of pleadings
• Striking pleadings
• Abuse of process
• Statutory immunity
• Vicarious liability
• Constructive dismissal

Read case analysis

Tsegaye v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck and dismissed a self-represented plaintiff’s claim against the Workers’ Compensation Board, finding statutory bars and an improper collateral attack.

• Privative clause
• Statutory immunity
• Judicial review versus civil action
• Foippa immunity (s.73)
• Strike/dismiss under rule 9-5 and summary dismissal under rule 9-6
• Strike-pleading

Read case analysis

Bryzzhev v. University of British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck a UBC student’s claim as a non-justiciable academic dispute about credit allocation and degree conferral, without leave to amend.

• Statutory immunity
• Justiciability of academic decisions
• Academic governance
• Breach of contract
• Breach of fiduciary duty
• Judicial review

Read case analysis

599253 Alberta Ltd. v. British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck a negligence claim over a dam, holding Waterway Houseboats foreclosed any private duty of care to the plaintiffs on the pleaded facts.

• Duty of care
• Proximity
• Privative clause
• Statutory immunity
• Failure to warn
• Freedom of information

Read case analysis