Curtis v. Canada (Human Rights Commission), 2020 FCA 149
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Canada) |
| Date | 25 September 2020 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
2 practice notes
-
Dhillon v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 1167
...at paras 62-65). [12] Cost orders are also subject to palpable and overriding error (Curtis v Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission), 2020 FCA 149 at paras 11-12; Lessard-Gauvin v Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 730 at paras 41-42). [13] Without this type of error, deference is to be ......
-
Mauricio Berrios v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration),
...litigants, they are not entitled to special treatment because they are self-represented: Curtis v Canada (Human Rights Commission), 2020 FCA 149 at para 31. It is also true that “[i]mplicit in the decision to act as his or her own counsel is the willingness to accept the consequences......
2 cases
-
Dhillon v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 1167
...at paras 62-65). [12] Cost orders are also subject to palpable and overriding error (Curtis v Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission), 2020 FCA 149 at paras 11-12; Lessard-Gauvin v Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 730 at paras 41-42). [13] Without this type of error, deference is to be ......
-
Mauricio Berrios v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration),
...litigants, they are not entitled to special treatment because they are self-represented: Curtis v Canada (Human Rights Commission), 2020 FCA 149 at para 31. It is also true that “[i]mplicit in the decision to act as his or her own counsel is the willingness to accept the consequences......