Canadian Caselaw

Court

Jurisdiction

Latest documents

• Maleki v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 590

  [1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD], dated January 26, 2023 [the Decision], in which the RAD upheld the decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] finding that the Applicant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27.

• Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2024 FCA 72

  [1] This is an appeal of a decision by the Federal Court (2022 FC 1398, per Justice Martine St-Louis) that found various claims of Canadian Patent No. 2,226,784 (the 784 Patent) to be invalid for overbreadth and insufficiency. As a result, the Federal Court dismissed actions by the appellants against the respondents alleging infringement of the 784 Patent. The respondents had also argued that the claims in issue were invalid for inutility, but the Federal Court elected not to decide that issue.

• Ho v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 585

  [1] The Applicant, Thanh Phong Ho [Applicant] seeks judicial review of a decision by an immigration officer [officer] dated November 12, 2022, which had refused the application for permanent residence under the Spouse and Common-Law family class category [Decision].

• Shahbazbeygi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 588

  [1] The Applicants seek judicial review of a decision from a visa officer refusing the visitor visa application of Hemat Shahbazbeygi, the Principal Applicant in this matter, pursuant to paragraph 179(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 (“IRPR”). The decision was based on the Principal Applicant’s lack of significant family ties outside of Canada and his purpose of visit being inconsistent with a temporary stay.

• Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Yihdego, 2024 FCA 70

  [1] Abel Nahusenay Yihdego was found to be inadmissible to Canada pursuant to paragraphs 34(1)(a) and (f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (IRPA) for being a member of an organization for which there are reasonable grounds to believe had engaged in espionage. These provisions make permanent residents and foreign nationals inadmissible to Canada on security grounds if they are members of an organization for which there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in espionage “against Canada or that is contrary to Canada’s interests”.

• Rahman v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 582

  [1] This is the judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] confirming the decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] that Mr. Sabbir Rahman [Applicant] is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

• Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, 2024 FCA 69

  [1] In accordance with paragraphs 34(1)(a) and (f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (IRPA), permanent residents and foreign nationals are inadmissible to Canada on security grounds if they are members of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in espionage “against Canada or that is contrary to Canada’s interests”.

• Shot Both Sides v. Canada, 2024 SCC 12

  [1]                             Treaties between the Crown and Indigenous peoples are fundamental to Canada’s history and constitutional landscape. The promises and obligations enshrined in these fundamental agreements reflect a lasting commitment to maintaining a just relationship between the Crown and Indigenous peoples and were intended to be honoured by the Crown “so long as the sun rises and the river flows” (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, vol. 2, Restructuring the Relationship (1996), at pp. 18-19, citing R. v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [1982] 2 All E.R. 118 (C.A.), at p. 124, per Lord Denning).

• Tapambwa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 577

  [1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration [Delegate] dated November 15, 2022 [Decision], refusing the Applicants’ application for Canadian citizenship pursuant to subsection 5(4) of the Citizenship Act, RSC 1985, c C-29 [Act].

• Jahanian v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 581

  [1] Nanzanin Jahanian, a citizen of Iran, applied for a study permit after Université Laval accepted her into a Master of Arts program specializing in educational technology. Her husband, Alireza Haghtalab, wished to accompany her to Canada so he applied for an open work permit. Both applications were refused by a visa officer with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) because the officer was not satisfied that they would leave Canada at the end of their 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. 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. 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. 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 ...