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 of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal from sentence, upholding an indeterminate sentence for dangerous offender findings based on violent history and unmanaged risk.
The Appellant failed to make reasonable efforts to obtain recommended treatment and did not follow medical advice without a reasonable explanation; medical records show missed appointments, inconsistent psychotherapy attendance and medication non‑compliance; because lack of treatment compliance could have materially altered the disability assessment, the Appellant did not prove on a balance of probabilities that her condition rendered her incapable of regularly pursuing any substantially gainful occupation, so the disability is not severe and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Claimant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that her disability was severe by December 31, 2020; contemporaneous pain specialist records indicated improvement and did not rule out sedentary work, and post‑2020 deterioration cannot be used to establish the MQP status; therefore the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to prove his disability was severe by the MQP date; medical evidence showed he repeatedly refused or discontinued recommended treatments and investigations without reasonable explanation and medical opinion indicated his functional capacity might have improved with treatment, therefore he did not establish inability regularly to pursue any substantially gainful occupation by December 31, 2024.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to prove a severe and prolonged disability within the coverage period (to Dec 31, 2016) required for a regular CPP disability pension, and he lacked the requisite contribution years for PRDB under the applicable (old) s.44(4); additionally, receipt of an early retirement pension and treatment non‑compliance preclude entitlement to significant retroactive regular disability payments.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because the medical evidence did not establish that the claimant was incapable, on a regular basis, of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation by December 31, 2021: records show improvement on medication, no contemporaneous medical evidence of disabling functional limitations in late 2021, residual work capacity existed, treatment options were available and job search efforts were inadequate.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because the Appellant failed to prove a severe disability as of December 31, 2023: objective medical findings were relatively mild and localized, functional limitations demonstrated residual capacity, she did not pursue alternative employment nor exhaust recommended multidisciplinary treatments, and therefore she was not regularly incapable of pursuing substantially gainful work.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal accepted the appellant's testimony and medical evidence that recurrent migraines produced functional limitations—frequent bedbound days, inability to tolerate light/noise, cognitive slowing and unpredictable attendance—that rendered him incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation from December 2022 onward; he followed medical advice and the condition is likely to be long continued, so the disability was severe and prolonged and CPP disability payments commence after the four‑month waiting period (April 2023).
Source excerpt
The Appeal Division allowed the Minister's appeal and set aside the General Division decision because the respondent failed to prove a severe disability as of December 31, 2020: medical evidence indicated physical recovery by that date, the respondent's significant mental deterioration post‑dates coverage, she unreasonably refused recommended pharmacotherapy without adequate justification, and she made no meaningful effort to seek alternative employment compatible with residual capacity; therefore she was not regularly incapable of substantially gainful employment.
Source excerpt
The Appellant failed to prove a severe disability as of December 31, 2023 because the record shows episodic rather than disabling impairments, medical providers did not definitively rule out return to work, the Appellant delayed following specialist medication recommendations and did not make meaningful efforts to pursue alternative employment; on that basis the Appeal Division dismissed the appeal without deciding prolongation.
Source excerpt
Explore more
