Canadian Caselaw

Court

Jurisdiction

Latest documents

  • Saini v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 758

    [1] The Applicants are a family from India: Anil Saini (Principal Applicant) and his wife Manav Saini (Associate Applicant) as well as their two children. They seek judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Appeal Division (“RAD”) that dismissed their appeal and found that they had a viable Internal Flight Alternative (“IFA”) in India.

  • Canada v. Wimmer Brook Enterprises Inc., 2024 FC 765

    [1] The Plaintiff, His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, brings this motion for summary judgment. It seeks to recover the amount of $383,756.63, plus interest and costs, against the Defendants, claiming that they are in default of their repayment obligations for funds received from the Advance Payment Program under the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act, SC 1997, c 20 [the AMPA].

  • Letourneau v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FC 760

    [1] The Applicant seeks judicial review of a second review decision made by an officer [Officer] of the Canada Revenue Agency [CRA] dated November 9, 2022. The Officer determined that the Applicant was not eligible for the $8,000 in Canada Emergency Response Benefit [CERB] payments he received pursuant to the Canada Emergency Response Benefit Act, SC 2020, c 5, s 8 [CERB Act] for the periods from June 7, 2020 to September 26, 2020 and required him to repay these amounts. Specifically, the Officer concluded that the Applicant failed to demonstrate that he had at least $5,000 of employment or self-employment income in 2019 or the 12 months prior to the date of the application. While the Officer also made an ineligibility determination in relation to Canada Recovery Benefit [CRB] payments the Applicant received under the Canada Recovery Benefits Act, SC 2020, c 12, s 2, the Applicant’s eligibility for CRB payments is not at issue on this application.

  • Elder v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 FC 763

    [1] The Applicant, Christopher Elder [the Applicant], is an inmate currently serving a life sentence at a minimum-security prison in Alberta. The events at issue on this application relate to a time when the Applicant was in custody at Bowden Institution. The Applicant filed a grievance under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, SC 1992, c. 20 [CCRA] after his escorted temporary absences [ETAs] were cancelled. The Institutional Head of the prison [the Warden] had cancelled the Applicant’s existing and pending ETAs after it was learned that the Applicant had violated the terms of his ETAs on multiple occasions. The Applicant appealed the Warden’s decisions using the grievance process provided for in the CCRA. The Warden’s decisions were reviewed by the Special Advisor to the Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada [CSC] who denied the Applicant’s final grievance response [the Special Advisor’s Decision or the Decision]. The Applicant seeks judicial review of the Special Advisor’s Decision.

  • Torres Pena v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 756

    [1] The applicants are citizens of Colombia. They have been directed to report for removal from Canada on May 19, 2024. On May 7, 2024, they asked the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to defer their removal. In a decision dated May 14, 2024, a CBSA Inland Enforcement Officer refused their request. The applicants have applied for leave and for judicial review of this decision. They now seek an order staying their removal pending the final determination of the judicial review application.

  • R. v. Lozada, 2024 SCC 18

    [1]                             The appellants, Emanuel Lozada and Victor Ramos, appeal as of right to this Court under s. 691(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. The majority of the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed their appeals from jury convictions for unlawful act manslaughter. The dissenting judge would have allowed their appeals and ordered a new trial.

  • Naserikarimvand v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 757

    [1] The Applicant, Danial Naserikarimvand, seeks judicial review of the decision of a visa officer denying his application for a study permit. Mr. Naserikarimvand had applied for a study permit to pursue a Masters in Business Administration [MBA] program at Trinity Western University [TWU]. The Officer concluded that Mr. Naserikarimvand’s proposed program did not appear reasonable given his employment and educational history, or his future career path. As a consequence, the Officer was not satisfied that the Applicant would leave Canada at the end of his stay.

  • Ajdadi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 754

    [1] The Applicant seeks judicial review of an Officer’s decision denying her a study permit. She submits that the decision is unreasonable because the Officer failed to engage with the evidence she submitted, and therefore the reasons are not transparent and intelligible.

  • Malik v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 755

    [1] In my view, the Decision is reasonable. It was open and justified for the Officer to find that the Applicant has significant family ties in Canada and none outside of Canada because the entirety of the Applicant’s immediate family resides in Canada, and the only family the Applicant has outside of Canada is their extended family in Pakistan.

  • Ojo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 752

    [1] The Applicant, Anjolaoluwa Ojo, a minor, applied to study for a social worker diploma at Georgian College in Ontario. An officer at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC] refused her application, finding that she had not established that she would leave Canada at the end of her authorized stay.

Featured documents

  • Hodgkinson v. Simms et al., (1994) 171 N.R. 245 (SCC)

    [1] La Forest, J. : This is a case of material nondisclosure in which the appellant alleges breach of fiduciary duty and breach of con­tract against the respondent in the perfor­mance of a contract for investment advice and other tax-related financial services. The respondent, Mr. Simms, was a...

  • R. v. Morgentaler, (1988) 82 N.R. 1 (SCC)

    [1] Dickson, C.J.C. : The principal issue raised by this appeal is whether the abortion provisions of the Criminal Code infringe the "right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice&quot...

  • R. v. Généreux, (1992) 133 N.R. 241 (SCC)

    [1] Lamer, C.J.C. : This appeal involves a constitutional challenge, under ss. 7, 11(d) and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , to the proceedings of a General Court Martial convened under the National Defence Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. N-5. The principal question raised in this case...

  • R. v. Grant (D.), (2009) 391 N.R. 1 (SCC)

    [1] McLachlin, C.J.C., and Charron, J. : Mr. Grant appeals his convictions on a series of firearms offences, relating to a gun seized by police during an encounter on a Toronto sidewalk. The gun was entered as evidence against Mr. Grant and formed the basis of his convictions. The question on this...

  • Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., 2002 SCC 33

    [1] Iacobucci and Major, JJ. : A proposi­tion that should be unnecessary to state is that a court of appeal should not interfere with a trial judge's reasons unless there is a palpable and overriding error. The same proposition is sometimes stated as prohibit­ing an appellate court from reviewing a ...

  • British Columbia v. Canadian Forest Products Ltd., 2004 SCC 38

    [1] Binnnie, J. : In the summer of 1992, a forest fire swept through the Stone Creek area of the Interior of British Columbia about 35 kilometres south of Prince George. Approximately 1,491 hectares were burned over, including areas where the appellant Canadian Forest Products Ltd. ("Canfor&quo...

  • New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir, (2008) 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1 (SCC)

    [1] Bastarache and LeBel, JJ. : This appeal calls on the Court to consider, once again, the troubling question of the approach to be taken in judicial review of decisions of administrative tribunals. The recent history of judicial review in Canada has been marked by ebbs and flows of deference,...

  • Reference Re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court (P.E.I.), (1997) 156 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1 (SCC)

    [1] Lamer, C.J.C. : The four appeals handed down today - Reference Re Re­muneration of Judges of the Provincial Court (P.E.I.) (No. 24508), Reference re Independence and Impartiality of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island (No. 24778), R. v. Campbell, R. v. Ekmecic and R. v....

  • R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), 2000 SCC 5

    [1] Lamer, C.J.C. : By passing the Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing) and other Acts in consequence thereof , S.C. 1995, c. 22 ("Bill C-41"), Parliament has sent a clear message to all Canadian judges that too many people are being sent to prison. In an attempt to remedy the...

  • R. v. C.A.M., (1996) 194 N.R. 321 (SCC)

    [1] Lamer, C.J.C. : In 1992, the respondent, C.A.M., pleaded guilty to numerous counts of sexual assault, incest, assault with a weapon, in addition to other lesser offences, arising from a largely uncontested pattern of sexual, physical and emotional abuse inflicted upon his children over a number ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT