in Case Law › Canada (Federal)
in vLex Canada

76150 results for Case Law › Canada (Federal)

  • vLex Rating
  • Yeager v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FCA 176

    [1]  Dr. Matthew Yeager appeals from a judgment of the Federal Court (2019 FC 774, Gleeson J.) dismissing, on redetermination, his application for judicial review. The decision he challenged was that of Correctional Services Canada, through Miguel Costa, a senior officer of CSC, denying Dr. Yeager access to the John Howard Society pre-release fairs held at a number of federal correctional...

  • M.S. v Canada, 2020 FC 982

    [1]  The applicant seeks authorization to institute a class action on behalf of parents who were allegedly deprived of the Canada Child Benefit, the GST/HST credit and other similar benefits. In short, the applicant argues that the Canada Revenue Agency [CRA] should not terminate these benefits when a child is the subject of a placement under child protection legislation but is still...

  • Juan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 988

    [1]  The Applicant, Vrenalyn Juan, is a Filipino citizen who has lived outside of her country of origin for many years. Between 2004 and 2012, she worked as a caregiver in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Hong Kong. The Applicant arrived in Canada on June 22, 2012, on a work permit issued under the Live-in Caregiver Program. The Applicant’s spouse, who has been diagnosed with chronic kidney...

  • Saunders v. The Queen, 2020 TCC 114

    [1]  The appeals of Ian Saunders [2018-4115(IT)I], Andrew Dewit [2018-4343(IT)I], and Glen Dunbar [2018-4411(IT)I] were heard on common evidence.

  • Shoan v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FCA 174

    [1]  The appellant appeals from the judgment dated May 7, 2018 of the Federal Court (per Russell J.): 2018 FC 476. The Federal Court dismissed the appellant’s application for judicial review of Order in Council PC 2017-0456. In that Order in Council, the Governor in Council terminated for cause the appellant’s good behaviour appointment as a CRTC Commissioner. The Federal Court rejected...

  • International Air Transport Association et al. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FCA 172

    [1]  The Attorney General of Canada seeks an order striking portions of two affidavits filed by the appellants in support of their challenge to the validity of the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, SOR/2019-150. Amongst other things, the appellants submit that certain portions of the Regulations should be set aside on the basis that they are incompatible with the Convention for the...

  • Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 SCC 28

    [1]                             In 1970, the Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada set out a galvanic blueprint for redressing the legal, economic, social and political barriers to full and fair participation faced by Canadian women for generations. Many of the inequities it identified have been spectacularly reversed, and the result has been enormous progressive change for women in...

  • Mirzaee v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 972

    [1]  The applicant, Ms. Mohadese Mirzaee, is a citizen of Afghanistan who is now 22 years old. Ms. Mirzaee claimed refugee protection when she arrived in Canada in August 2016, at the age of 18. At the time, she alleged that she feared persecution by the Taliban because of her gender and her perceived political opinion related to Western associations, as well as her mother’s employment with

  • Williams (IT Essentials) v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 2020 FCA 173

    [1]  This is an assessment of costs pursuant to a Judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal dated November 25, 2019, wherein the Appellant’s appeal of an Order of the Federal Court dated January 28, 2019 in file T-1304-17 was “dismissed with costs, including the costs of preparation of the appeal book.”

  • Canada (Attorney General) v. Impex Solutions Inc., 2020 FCA 171

    [1]  Before the Court is an appeal brought under s. 68 of the Customs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.1 (2nd Supp.) (Act) from a decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (Tribunal), dated May 27, 2019, regarding the tariff classification of disposable shoe covers (model No. KBCP525) imported by the respondent (Appeal No. AP-2017-065).

  • Senadheerage v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 968

    [1]  Mr. Senadheerage seeks judicial review of the dismissal of his claim for asylum. I am granting his application, for two inter-related reasons. First, the decision-maker found certain parts of his narrative implausible, without providing a firm basis for this finding. Second, it found that Mr. Senadheerage failed to provide corroborative evidence, without explaining why corroboration...

  • Akintola v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 971

    [1]  Kolawole Monsur Akintola, his wife Abiola Shakirat Akintola, and two of their minor children apply for judicial review pursuant to section 72(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA].  They are citizens of Nigeria who allege a fear of persecution on the basis that Mr. Akintola is a bisexual man whose sexual orientation was exposed in 2017.  The applicants’

  • Burai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 966

    [1]  The applicants, Mr. Gabor Burai and Mrs. Sarolta Forgacs, are a married couple from Hungary and members of the Roma ethnic group. When they arrived in Canada in 2011, they claimed refugee protection based on their fear of discrimination and violence in Hungary due to their Roma ethnicity. In a decision issued in September 2019 [Decision], a panel of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD]

  • Housou v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 964

    [1]  The main applicant in this matter, Mr. Kokou Felix Housou, is a citizen of Togo. Mr. Housou fled his country of nationality some 26 years ago, he received refugee status in neighbouring Ghana, and he has been living with his family in Ghana ever since. The four other applicants are Mr. Housou’s dependents, namely his wife and children.

  • Western Transloading Corporation v. Peterson, 2020 FC 967

    [1]  This proceeding is a consolidation of two (2) related applications for judicial review.

  • Wasylynuk v. Canada (Royal Mounted Police), 2020 FC 962

    [1]  The applicant is a Corporal with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. He seeks an order for mandamus and an injunction pending his judicial review application, under ss. 18.2 and 44 of the Federal Courts Act, RSC 1985, c F-7.

  • Rybakov v. Canada, 2020 FCA 169

    [1]  Before the Court are appeals from interlocutory orders of the Tax Court (per Monaghan J.) that denied the appellants’ motions for default judgment brought pursuant to section 63 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure), S.O.R./90-688a (GP Rules). The appeals concern the applicable timeline for the Crown to file replies in these matters.

  • Biya v. The Queen, 2020 TCC 113

    [1]  This is an Appeal of an assessment by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) for the 2013 taxation year to include total income of $230,828. The assessment is based on the conclusion by the Minister that Nejib Abba Biya (the “Appellant”) was a resident of Canada during the 2013 taxation year and therefore was taxable in Canada on the income amount of $230,828.

  • R. v. Reilly, 2020 SCC 27
  • Matthews v. Ocean Nutrition Canada Ltd., 2020 SCC 26

    [1]                             This appeal bears on the redress available to an employee who, by reason of the circumstances of his departure from a job he had held for many years, is treated in law as if he were dismissed. By extension, it concerns some of the proper contours of an employer’s common law right to determine the composition of its workforce.

  • Sun v. The Queen, 2020 TCC 112

    [1]  This is a New Housing Rebate case.

  • Van der Steen v. Canada, 2020 FCA 168

    [1]  Mr. van der Steen appeals to this Court from a Judgment of the Tax Court (2019 TCC 23) which denied his claim for a charitable donation tax credit in relation to a payment that he made to the Canadian Literacy Enhancement Society (CLES) in 2004. The Tax Court concluded that Mr. van der Steen did not establish that he had the necessary donative intent in relation to this payment.

  • Gouskos v. The Queen, 2020 TCC 110

    [1]  The question under appeal is whether Ms. Gouskos was eligible to receive the Canada Child Tax Benefit (the “CCTB”) in the taxation years 2011 and 2012.

  • Wojcik v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 958

    [1]  The Applicant was denied a security clearance under s 53(1) of the Cannabis Regulations, SOR/2018-144 [Regulations] by the Director General [Director], Controlled Substances and Cannabis Branch, Health Canada [the Decision]. The Applicant asks for judicial review on the grounds of (1) breach of procedural fairness and (2) unreasonableness of the Decision.

  • R. v. Chouhan*,
  • R. v. Esseghaier*,
  • Canada v. 2078970 Ontario Inc., 2020 FCA 162

    [1]  These appeals arise as a result of the response provided by the Tax Court of Canada to a question submitted under Rule 58 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure), SOR/90-688a (the General Procedure Rules). The question was:

  • Kileel Developments Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FCA 163

    [1]  This is an application for judicial review of an April 4, 2019 decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal), with reasons issued on April 24, 2019, and cited as Kileel Developments Ltd., 2019 CanLII 110909 (CA CITT), [2019] C.I.T.T. No. 40 (QL) [Reasons of the Tribunal], in which it dismissed a complaint brought by the applicant, Kileel Developments Ltd. (Kileel)

  • Canada v. Kattenburg, 2020 FCA 164

    [1]  An appeal has been brought from a judicial review in the Federal Court: 2019 FC 1003 (per Mactavish J. as she then was). The appeal is pending in this Court.

  • Beddows v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FCA 166

    [1]  This appeal is from a judgment of Justice Boswell of the Federal Court (the Application Judge) (Beddows v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 671, 305 A.C.W.S. (3d) 759 (Beddows 2019)) dismissing an application for judicial review from a decision of the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS), dated July 3, 2018. In that decision, the CDS denied a grievance submitted by the appellant under...

  • Free signup to view additional results