- Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (59311)
- Supreme Court of British Columbia (51900)
- Federal Court (35829)
- Supreme Court of Canada (25969)
- Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (25040)
- Ontario Court of Appeal (21627)
- Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan (17156)
- Court of Appeal of British Columbia (16560)
- Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (14832)
- Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (12649)
- Court of Appeal (Alberta) (12331)
- Federal Court of Appeal (Canada) (10958)
- Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (9582)
- Ontario Court of Justice (9130)
- Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, Trial Division (8344)
- Provincial Court (Alberta) (7154)
- Court of Appeal of New Brunswick (6263)
- Court of Appeal (Manitoba) (5956)
- Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan (5715)
- Nova Scotia Court of Appeal (3802)
- Newfoundland Court of Appeal (2628)
- Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (2563)
- Provincial Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (1527)
- Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (1115)
- Small Claims Court of Nova Scotia (1045)
- Provincial Court of Manitoba (1014)
- Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories (911)
- Territorial Court of Yukon (676)
- Provincial Court of New Brunswick (669)
- Tax Court of Canada (651)
- Nunavut Court of Justicie (354)
- Court of Appeal (Yukon Territory) (267)
- Territorial Court of the Northwest Territories (219)
- Court of Appeal for the Northwest Territories (123)
- Nova Scotia Probate Court (108)
- Court of Appeal of Nunavaut (79)
- Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island (68)
- Provincial Court of British Columbia (22)
- Jeffrey v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2019 FC 1180
 This case concerns the degree of disclosure that must be provided to someone who has been provided an opportunity to make written submissions explaining why an inadmissibility report under subsection 44(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA] should not be made against him.
- Bangladesh v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 1177
 In 1996, Mr Nur Chowdhury and his wife, citizens of Bangladesh, were granted visitor status in Canada. Soon thereafter, they applied for refugee protection.
- Kinghorne v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 1183
 Shawn Kinghorne seeks judicial review of a decision of the Grand Manan Harbour Authority [Harbour Authority] to restrict access to White Head Harbour on the first day of the 2016 lobster fishing season [Access Policy]. The Harbour Authority made the decision pursuant to its power delegated by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans [Minister] under the Fishing and Recreational Harbours Act, RSC 1985, c F-24.
- Office and Professional Employees International Union v. Cougar Helicopters Inc., 2019 FCA 231
 The applicant has applied for judicial review of a decision of the Canada Industrial Relations Board. In support of that application, it has filed two affidavits. One of these affidavits is unchallenged but the other has sparked some controversy.
- Amadi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1166
 The Applicants, a family of four, seek judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board, dated January 9, 2019. The RAD dismissed the Applicants’ appeal of the decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] which had denied their claim for refugee protection under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 [the Act].
- Betser-Zilevitch v. Nexen Inc., 2019 FCA 230
 This is an appeal from a decision of a judge of the Federal Court (the Judge) pursuant to which the respondents’ motion to enforce a settlement agreement was granted. The Court found that the parties had entered into a binding agreement to settle the underlying patent infringement action, the terms of which are set out in the appellant’s written offer to settle dated January 25, 2017. The Judge further found that the agreement covered all essential terms, and proceeded to determine the non-essential terms upon which the parties disagreed in their attempt to formalize the settlement agreement. As a result, the Judge discontinued the appellant’s action against the respondents, and ordered the appellant to pay the respondents’ motion costs in the amount of $5,000.00.
- Fray v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1159
 This is an application for judicial review of the decision of an Officer [the Officer] of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC], dated November 9, 2018 [the Decision], in which the Officer denied the Applicant permanent residence on the basis that the Officer was not satisfied that she is a member of the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class or that she met the definition of a common-law partner as deﬁned in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 [the Regulations].
- Ikheloa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1161
 The Applicants seek judicial review of a December 14, 2018 decision made by a member of the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada [the Decision], upholding the December 21, 2017 decision of a member of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD], finding that the Applicants were not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection within the meaning of sections 96 and 97(1), respectively, of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA].
- Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Sharafaldin, 2019 FC 1168
 The Minister seeks judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] to postpone Mr. Sharafaldin’s cessation hearing. I am dismissing this application given the exceptional circumstances of this case.
- Damian v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 1158
 A child who is brought to Canada by a parent cannot be faulted for remaining in Canada without legal status as a child. If that child, grown to adulthood, applies for permanent residence, it is unreasonable for an immigration officer to hold it against them that the time they spent in Canada during their childhood resulted from a disregard of immigration law.
- R. v. Marakah, 142 WCB (2d) 490
 Can Canadians ever reasonably expect the text messages they send to remain private, even after the messages have reached their destination? Or is the state free, regardless of the circumstances, to access text messages from a recipient’s device without a warrant?...
- R. v. Bradshaw, 2017 SCC 35
 Hearsay is an out-of-court statement tendered for the truth of its contents. It is presumptively inadmissible because — in the absence of the opportunity to cross-examine the declarant at the time the statement is made — it is often difficult for the trier of fact...
- R. v. Charles (S.),  N.R. TBEd. AP.010
 McLachlin, C.J.C. (LeBel, Abella, Cromwell, Karakatsanis and Gascon, JJ., concurring) : Gun-related crime poses grave danger to Canadians. Parliament has therefore chosen to prohibit some weapons outright, while restricting the possession of others. The Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46,...
- R. v. Boutilier, 2017 SCC 64
 The appellant, Mr. Boutilier, challenges the constitutional validity of s. 753(1) and (4.1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 , two provisions at the core of the dangerous offender regime, under ss. 7 and 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and...
- R. v. Jones,  2 SCR 696
 The appellant, Mr. Jones, was convicted of several firearms and drug trafficking offences. His convictions rest on records of text messages seized from a Telus account associated with his co-accused pursuant to a production order obtained under s. 487.012 (now s. 48...
- Delta Air Lines Inc. v. Lukács, 416 DLR (4th) 579
 The respondent, Dr. Gábor Lukács, filed a complaint with the Canadian Transportation Agency (“Agency”), alleging that the appellant, Delta Air Lines Inc. (“Delta”), applied discriminatory practices governing the carriage of obese persons. The Agency dismissed this...
- R. v. Paterson, 347 CCC (3d) 280
 This appeal raises three distinct issues: (1) the applicability of the common law confessions rule to statements tendered in a voir dire under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ; (2) whether, on the facts of this case, exigent circumstances, within the...
- Agraira v. Can. (SCC),  SCJ No 36 (QL)
 LeBel, J. (McLachlin, C.J.C., Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver and Karakatsanis, JJ., concurring) : The appellant, Muhsen Ahmed Ramadan Agraira, a citizen of Libya, has been residing in Canada continuously since 1997, despite having been found to be inadmissible on security grounds in 2002....
- Carter v. Can. (A.G.) (SCC), JE 2015-245
 By the Court : It is a crime in Canada to assist another person in ending her own life. As a result, people who are grievously and irremediably ill cannot seek a physician's assistance in dying and may be condemned to a life of severe and intolerable suffering. A person facing this prospect has ...
- Douez v. Facebook, Inc., 411 DLR (4th) 434
 Forum selection clauses purport to oust the jurisdiction of otherwise competent courts in favour of a foreign jurisdiction. To balance contractual freedom with the public good in having local courts adjudicate certain claims, courts have developed a test to...