M.(K.) v. M.(H.),

JurisdictionFederal Jurisdiction (Canada)
JudgeLa Forest, Gérard V.; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley; Iacobucci, Frank
Date29 October 1992
Citation[1992] 3 SCR 6,AZ-92111111,1992 CanLII 31 (SCC),57 OAC 321,142 NR 321,JE 92-1644,96 DLR (4th) 289,36 ACWS (3d) 466,14 CCLT (2d) 1,EYB 1992-67549,[1992] SCJ No 85 (QL)
Docket Number21763
CourtSupreme Court (Canada)

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
869 practice notes
  • Scalera v. Lloyd's of London
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • May 3, 2000
    ...Stonehouse, [1926] 2 D.L.R. 683 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. F., Re, [1990] 2 A.C. 1 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 19]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. Freeman v. Home Office, [1983] 3 All E.R. 589 (Q.B.), affd. [1984] 1 All E.R. 1036 (C.A.), re......
  • Bowes v. Edmonton (City) et al., 2003 ABQB 492
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen''s Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • May 30, 2003
    ...refd to. [para. 14]. NPS Farms Ltd. et al. v. Dupont Canada Inc. et al. (2001), 297 A.R. 318 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 14]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321; 96 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. Photinopoulos v. Photinopoulos et al. (1988), 92 A.R. 122; 54 D.L.R.(4t......
  • Manitoba Métis Federation Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al.
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
    • December 7, 2007
    ...R. 3 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 432]. Brophy v. Manitoba (Attorney General), [1895] A.C. 202 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 433]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. R. v. Blais (E.L.J.) (2001), 156 Man.R.(2d) 53; 246 W.A.C. 53; 198 D.L.R.(4th) 220; 2001 MBCA......
  • R. v. Chisholm (G.)
    • Canada
    • Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
    • April 9, 1997
    ...R. v. Marquard (D.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 81; 66 O.A.C. 161; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 70, footnote 2]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321; 96 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. 70, footnote R. v. D.R., H.R. and D.W., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 291; 197 N.R. 3......
  • Get Started for Free
770 cases
  • Scalera v. Lloyd's of London
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court (Canada)
    • May 3, 2000
    ...Stonehouse, [1926] 2 D.L.R. 683 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. F., Re, [1990] 2 A.C. 1 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 19]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. Freeman v. Home Office, [1983] 3 All E.R. 589 (Q.B.), affd. [1984] 1 All E.R. 1036 (C.A.), re......
  • Bowes v. Edmonton (City) et al., 2003 ABQB 492
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen''s Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • May 30, 2003
    ...refd to. [para. 14]. NPS Farms Ltd. et al. v. Dupont Canada Inc. et al. (2001), 297 A.R. 318 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 14]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321; 96 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. Photinopoulos v. Photinopoulos et al. (1988), 92 A.R. 122; 54 D.L.R.(4t......
  • Manitoba Métis Federation Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al.
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
    • December 7, 2007
    ...R. 3 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 432]. Brophy v. Manitoba (Attorney General), [1895] A.C. 202 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 433]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. R. v. Blais (E.L.J.) (2001), 156 Man.R.(2d) 53; 246 W.A.C. 53; 198 D.L.R.(4th) 220; 2001 MBCA......
  • R. v. Chisholm (G.)
    • Canada
    • Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
    • April 9, 1997
    ...R. v. Marquard (D.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 81; 66 O.A.C. 161; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 70, footnote 2]. K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; 142 N.R. 321; 57 O.A.C. 321; 96 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. 70, footnote R. v. D.R., H.R. and D.W., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 291; 197 N.R. 3......
  • Get Started for Free
11 firm's commentaries
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (March 8 ' March 12, 2021)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • March 15, 2021
    ...[1994] 1 S.C.R. 656, Hryniak v. Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 87, Levesque v. Crampton Estate, 2017 ONCA 455, M.(K.) v. M.(H.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6, Beaudoin Estate v. Campbellford Memorial Hospital, 2021 ONCA 57, Pioneer Corp. v. Godfrey, 2019 SCC 42 Short Civil Decisions Paulpillai E......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (August 28 ' September 1)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • September 5, 2023
    ...Ermineskin Indian Band and Nation v. Canada, 2009 SCC 9, Beckman v. Little Salmon/Carmacks First Nation, 2010 SCC 53, M.(K.) v. M.(H.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6, Feather v. The Queen (1865), 122 E.R. 1191 (K.B.), Matthews v. Ministry of Defence, [2003] UKHL 4, [2003] 1 A.C. 1163, M. v. Home Office......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (October 16 ' 20, 2023)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 23, 2023
    ...2022 ONSC 5599, McKenzie v. Walsh, [1920] 61 S.C.R. 312, Green v. Bank of Montreal, 1999 CanLII 821 (Ont. C.A.), M.(K.) v. M.(H.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6, Chippewas of Sarnia Band v. Canada (Attorney General) (2000), 51 O.R. (3d) 641 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused, [2001] S.C.C.A. No. 63, K.(K.......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (July 25, 2022 ' July 29, 2022)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • August 2, 2022
    ...2011 SCC 24, Hodgkinson v Simms, [1994] 3 SCR 377, Galambos v Perez, 2009 SCC 48, Dolmage v Ontario, 2010 ONSC 1726, M(K) v M(H), [1992] 3 SCR 6, Guerin v The Queen, [1984] 2 SCR 335, (Attorney General) v Thouin, 2017 SCC 46, Kenny v Lockwood, [1932] OR 141 (CA), McInerney v MacDonald, [199......
  • Get Started for Free
87 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Civil Litigation
    • June 16, 2010
    ...45 M. v. H., [1999] 2 S.C.R. 3, 171 D.L.R. (4th) 577, [1999] S.C.J. No. 23 .............. 132 M.(K.) v. M.(H.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6, 96 D.L.R. (4th) 289, [1992] S.C.J. No. 85 ..... 74 MacDonald v. Ontario Hydro (1994), 19 O.R. (3d) 529, 38 C.P.C. (3d) 378, [1994] O.J. No. 1670 (Gen. Div.), af......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive The Law of Equitable Remedies. Second Edition
    • June 18, 2013
    ...504 J-Tech Design Ltd. v. Bosnjak, [2009] O.J. No. 932 (S.C.J.)................................ 428 K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6, 96 D.L.R. (4th) 289, [1992] S.C.J. No. 85...................................................................................... 193 K.V.P. Co. v. McKie, [1949......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive Special Lectures 2008. Personal Injury Law
    • September 2, 2009
    ...2003 SCC 51 ........................................................................................................ 523 K.M. v. H.M., [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6, 96 D.L.R. (4th) 289, [1992] S.C.J. No. 85 ............... 491 Kamloops (City of) v. Nielsen, [1984] 2 S.C.R 2, 10 D.L.R. (4th) 641, [1984......
  • Management and Enforcement
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Intellectual Property Law. Second Edition
    • June 15, 2011
    ...or misrepresentation relating to the claim: ibid. , s. 15(4). 571 Limitations Act , ibid. , s. 16(1)(a). 572 M.(K.) v. M.(H.) , [1992] 3 S.C.R. 6; Fisher , above note 338 at [79]. Management and Enforcement 663 ii) Delay Long delay in bringing a claim affects only the credibility of the com......
  • Get Started for Free