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 Tax Court granted the Crown leave to withdraw certain admissions about share fair market value and file further amended replies, but ordered costs to the Appellants.
The court dismissed the plaintiff’s application to withdraw deemed admissions under Rule 7-7, finding no adequate evidentiary basis to justify relief.
The court granted leave to file a second amended notice of civil claim in this defamation action, holding paragraph 37 was not a binding admission and that key claims could remain pleaded.
The Court dismissed the appeal because the trial judge correctly applied the Champoux test and refused to allow withdrawal of deemed admissions where the appellants provided an insufficient explanation and could not show absence of uncompensable prejudice; the corollary exclusion of contradictory portions of late affidavits and refusal to permit a late witness were valid exercises of trial management; on the admissible record the judge correctly found unjust enrichment (enrichment of appellants by $160,000, corresponding deprivation to respondent, and no juristic reason), and awarded judgment…
Source excerpt
The court declined to strike defamation and privacy claims in a family law case, but allowed the respondent to withdraw an admission about the separation date.
The court awarded special costs against all defendants, jointly and severally, finding reprehensible litigation conduct including late admissions, disclosure failures, and false testimony.
The court granted leave to withdraw deemed admissions from an untimely response to a notice to admit in a builders lien dispute, and accepted the late express admissions.
The court dismissed a strike application concerning amended pleadings in a historical debt claim, finding no clear withdrawal of admissions and no plain statute bar.
The court held the plaintiff’s amended pleadings were not a withdrawal of admissions and dismissed the defendant’s application, awarding costs to the plaintiff.
The Tax Court did not err in allowing the Crown to amend its reply and withdraw admissions because the new argument was consequential on the pleaded facts, the admissions were inconsistent with that argument, no uncompensable prejudice to the appellant was shown, and the interests of justice favored amendment; the appellate court will not overturn the discretionary decision absent extricable legal error or a palpable and overriding factual error.
Source excerpt
Explore more
