vLex Canada

Case Law

Draft Bills

  • Mohammad v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 473

    The Applicant seeks judicial review of the pre-removal risk assessment [PRRA] conducted by an immigration officer [the Officer] on July 16, 2019 pursuant to sections 112 and 113 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001 c 27 [Act]. The Officer concluded that the Applicant would not be subject to persecution or to a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment if returned to his country of birth and habitual residence, Kuwait. (See Decision)

    Apr 4, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Dauphinee v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2020 FC 474

    This is an application for judicial review of a decision by the Entitlement Appeal Panel (“Appeal Panel”) of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board of Canada (“VRAB”), affirming the decision of the Entitlement Review Panel (“Review Panel”) denying the disability award entitlement sought by the Applicant pursuant to s 45 of the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act, SC 2005, c 21 (“Compensation Act”). (See Decision)

    Apr 4, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Yavari v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2020 FC 469

    Darioush Yavari (the Applicant) seeks to overturn three related decisions that have resulted in him being found inadmissible to Canada because of serious criminality. This stems from an incident that occurred in February 2017, when he was arrested after attempting to enter a nightclub while in possession of a loaded handgun, approximately $12,000 in cash and 8.4 grams of marijuana. In August 2017, the Applicant pled guilty to several firearms offences as well as possession of marijuana. He was sentenced to 326 days’ imprisonment plus 282 days of remand. (See Decision)

    Apr 4, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Lalee v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship) - 2020 FC 460

    The Applicant is a citizen of Thailand. On May 6, 2019, an immigration officer [Officer] refused her application for Permanent Residence on humanitarian and compassionate [H & C] grounds. She applies for judicial review of this decision pursuant to s 72 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA]. (See Decision)

    Apr 4, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Saleh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 457

    Othman Mahmood Saleh [Mr. Saleh] seeks judicial review pursuant to section 72 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA] from a decision of the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. The RAD dismissed Mr. Saleh’s appeal from the Refugee Protection Division’s [RPD] decision, finding that he was neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection. (See Decision)

    Apr 4, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Keto - 2020 FC 467

    This case concerns the decision of the Immigration Appeal Division (“IAD”) dismissing the Minister’s appeal of an Immigration Division’s (“ID”) decision, which found the Respondent, Mr. Keto, not inadmissible under subsection 34(1)(f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 (“IRPA”), for membership in the Ethiopian organization Ginbot 7 (“G7”). (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • R. v. Friesen - 2020 SCC 9

    Children are the future of our country and our communities. They are also some of the most vulnerable members of our society. They deserve to enjoy a childhood free of sexual violence. Offenders who commit sexual violence against children deny thousands of Canadian children such a childhood every year. This case is about how to impose sentences that fully reflect and give effect to the profound wrongfulness and harmfulness of sexual offences against children. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Satkunanathan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 470

    This is an application for judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Appeal Division [IAD] dated April 19, 2019, wherein the IAD dismissed the appeal of an immigration officer’s decision to refuse the Applicant’s sponsorship application. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Cruz v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 455

    This is an application for judicial review of a decision by a migration officer (“Migration Officer”) in the Permanent Resident Unit of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada at the Embassy of Canada in Manila, which rejected the Applicant’s application for permanent residence because his spouse was criminally inadmissible to Canada pursuant to s 36(1)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 (“IRPA”). As a result, the Migration Officer found that the Applicant was also inadmissible to Canada pursuant to s 42(1)(a) of IRPA. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • A.B. v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 461

    AB is a citizen of India. He is a journalist and editor-in-chief of an Indian newspaper. He seeks judicial review of a decision of a Canadian visa officer [Officer] to refuse his application for a permanent resident visa under s 12(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA]. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Brar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 445

    Upinder Singh Brar, the Applicant, and his two children, all of Indian citizenship [Applicants], seek judicial review pursuant to section 72 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA] of a visa officer’s [Officer] decision dated May 23, 2019 refusing their Temporary Resident Visa [TRV]. The Applicants seek to have the decision set aside and remitted to a different officer for redetermination. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Dadashpourlangeroudi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 424

    Farhad Dadashpourlangeroudi [the “Applicant”] applies for judicial review of a decision made on August 8, 2018 [“Decision”] by the Refugee Protection Division [“RPD”] in which two applications made by the Applicant seeking reinstatement of his withdrawn claim for refugee protection were dismissed. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc First Nation v. Canada - 2020 FC 399

    This is a class proceeding brought by the representative Plaintiffs seeking damages for alleged harm caused by Canada’s role in the administration of residential day schools, mainly in the form of language and cultural deprivations. The period of time contemplated by the action runs between 1920 to 1979. Needless to say, the documentary record pertaining to the issues raised by the Plaintiffs is substantial and much of it is made up of old handwritten and typewritten documents of poor quality and resolution. I am told by the parties that Canada’s documentary production is expected to run to at least 132,000 documents. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 2:07 PM

  • COVID-19: The Essential Need-to-Know Guide for Employers and Employees

    The immediate impact of the 2019 novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) has caused major disruptions to Ontario’s workplaces. In recent weeks, new questions have emerged for employers, including whether their workplace is considered an essential or nonessential business, whether lay-off is appropriate, whether their business qualifies for any government relief, and what new measures exist to help provide funding for payroll. (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 8:32 AM

  • COVID-19: Employment and Labour Round-Up

    With changes and updates coming out almost daily, set out below is a brief summary of recent announcements from the federal government, and provincial governments in Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia, which relate to employment matters. This information is current as of March 31, 2020. (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 8:32 AM

  • OSFI Provides Guidance to Administrators of Federally Regulated Pension Plans Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic

    On March 27, 2020, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) announced a series of regulatory adjustments designed to help reduce some of the operational stress on federally regulated institutions, including federally regulated pension plans. The key measures announced for federally regulated private pension plans include... (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 8:32 AM

  • 2020 merger review thresholds for Competition Act and Investment Canada Act

    The threshold for certain pre-closing net benefit reviews under the Investment Canada Act (ICA) and the threshold for a pre-closing merger notification under the Competition Act have now both been released for 2020. The Commissioner of Competition announced on April 1 that the threshold would remain the same as in 2019. Competition Act Canada uses a two-part test for... (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:36 AM

  • Deference to Arbitrator Falls When Best Interests of Child Are Overlooked

    In Canada, courts are becoming increasingly deferential to arbitrators as a result of opinions from the Supreme Court of Canada, namely, Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. British Columbia, 2017 SCC 32, and the rapid growth of arbitration, as our court system continues to flounder under the weight of increased traffic and the related costs. While... (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:36 AM

  • Food Safety expert at Canada’s University of Guelph on grocery store shopping

    A food safety expert released an informative YouTube video (that you can watch here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snnpNx6gRIY&utm_source=guelphtoday.com&utm_campaign=guelphtoday.com&utm_medium=referral) to correct inaccurate information that has been circulating about proper protocol when buying groceries and taking them home. Generally, the same cleanliness rules apply that food safety experts would recommend for common foodborne pathogens like Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria:... (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:36 AM

  • SEC Filing Deadlines for Canadian Issuers

    During the current coronavirus crisis, the SEC has issued an Order providing filing extensions that apply to Canadian issuers. The following is a summary of the SEC’s new filing requirements. (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:33 AM

  • UPDATE #2: What Does the 75% Wage Subsidy Mean for Employers?

    The Government of Canada continues to announce details of the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (the “Subsidy”). On April 1, 2020, the following details were provided: The Subsidy is available to companies (including partnerships and sole proprietors), not-for-profits and charities. (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:33 AM

  • Bill 16 Establishes Deposit Protection for Condo Unit Buyers

    Stories where an aborted new condominium project resulted in unit buyers losing their deposits are still all too common. On December 6, 2019, the National Assembly of Quebec adopted Bill 16 entitled An Act mainly to regulate building inspections and divided co-ownership, to replace the name and improve the rules of operation of the Régie du logement and to amend the Act respecting the Société d'habitation du Québec and various legislative provisions concerning municipal affairs (Act). (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:32 AM

  • COVID-19 Class Actions Weekly Roundup

    The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has thrown the global economy and social framework into turmoil. The impacts of the pandemic will inevitably be reflected in class actions, with new COVID-related class proceedings having already been commenced in the United States and Canada. Litigation arising out of the pandemic is still in its early stages but we already see a spectrum of claims ranging from more conventional product and misrepresentation-based claims to proposals for novel, or simply spurious, uses of the class action procedure. (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:32 AM

  • UPDATED: Canada Provides Expanded Relief To All Businesses Responding To COVID-19 Pandemic

    The Government of Canada has expanded the scope and criteria for companies seeking relief pursuant to the nearly $100 billion federal COVID-19 Economic Response Plan. Prime Minister Trudeau has advised that Parliament will be recalled to Ottawa in order to pass the additional legislation required to authorize these programs. (See Article)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:32 AM

  • Kuo v. Waldmann - 2020 BCSC 495

    These reasons address a client initiated appointment brought pursuant to the Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 9 (the “LPA”). The client seeks both an examination of contingency fee agreements dated February 15, 2007 (the “2007 CFA”) and June 4, 2014 (the “2014 CFA”), respectively, as well as a review of the final bill issued by the Law Firm on January 2, 2018, pursuant to the 2014 CFA (the “Bill”) and a more modest disbursement bill issued on August 11, 2016. The Law Firm seeks payment from the Client for fees, taxes and disbursements in the total sum of $291,627.58. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:07 AM

  • Middleton v. Lightheart - 2020 BCSC 437

    On September 5, 2014, the plaintiff, Mr. Middleton, was driving home from work. As he drove eastbound on Kingsway, the defendant’s vehicle turned in front of him. The front of Mr. Middleton’s vehicle struck the passenger side of the defendant’s vehicle. The defendant admits liability for the accident. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:07 AM

  • Fox Estate v. Sevilla-Blanco - 2020 BCSC 497

    The defendant, Lorena Sevilla-Blanco, applies to set aside a default judgment taken against her by the plaintiff. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:07 AM

  • Dolden v. VGC Vancouver General Contractors Inc. - 2020 BCSC 492

    The defendant VGC Vancouver General Contractors Inc. (“VGC”) applies for leave to issue a third party notice against Puzzle Developments Ltd. (“Puzzle”). (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:07 AM

  • Ghazgbi v. Bhamrah - 2020 BCSC 496

    The plaintiff, Mr. Ahmad Ghazgbi, seeks damages arising from two motor vehicle accidents occurring in October and December 2015. Liability is admitted on behalf of all of the defendants save for the defendant Raminderjit Kaur Kahlon. The plaintiff agrees to the discontinuance of the proceeding as against her. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:07 AM

  • Lu v. Shen - 2020 BCSC 490

    In this action, two women who barely know one another, and who have rarely met one another in person, sue one another for defamation, breach of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Their claims against one another are the product of a verbal war they have waged against one another in social media for over a decade. After this action was filed, the war intensified, and was played out mostly (but not exclusively) in court filings and very lengthy affidavits. Each represented herself at the trial. (See Decision)

    Apr 3, 2020 6:07 AM