Our Latest Posts
TheCourt.ca is the premier source of commentary on, and analysis of, the work of the Supreme Court of Canada. Our goal is to be an inclusive forum for students, academics, practitioners and interested citizens to publish, review and discuss commentary on recent Supreme Court of Canada judgments, upcoming cases, current hearings, scholarly perspectives, practical insights, updates and more.
-
Delete at Your Own Risk: Spoliation in SS&C Technologies v BNY Mellon
|
Destroying evidence should never leave a party better off. In SS&C Technologies Canada Corp v Bank of New York Mellon Corp, the Supreme Court of Canada considered how courts should address situations when a party intentionally deletes evidence relevant to the calculation of damages. For the first time in more than a century, the Court clarified the law of spoliation. I suggest that while the Court shows how far the resulting adverse inference can go in the most severe cases, it leaves trial judges unsure when to go that far.
-
Ceiling or No Ceiling? R v R.B.-C. and When Sentencing Delay Becomes Unreasonable
|
In R v R.B.-C., the Supreme Court of Canada was asked to apply a presumptive ceiling to determine when sentencing delay breaches s. 11(b) of the Charter. Justice Martin declined to do so, holding instead that the test is a ‘markedly longer’ standard. She also held that the correct remedy for unreasonable sentencing delay is a reduction in sentence. This unanimous decision from the Court reveals how it views judges as normative actors within the Canadian criminal justice system.
-
R v Nguyen: Can Property Be Forfeited After a Stay of Proceedings?
|
A stay of criminal proceedings ends an accused’s prosecution, but does it also prevent the Crown from seeking forfeiture of property allegedly connected to criminal activity? In R v Nguyen, 2026 SCC 10 [Nguyen], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC” or the “Court”) considered whether the Crown could pursue forfeiture after criminal proceedings were stayed
-
Can a Failed Candidate Sue an Election Official? In Resler v Anglin the SCC Says Yes
|
In Resler v Anglin, the Supreme Court of Canada confronted two fundamental interests seemingly at odds: the integrity of elections and the right to seek compensation for civil wrongs. The majority held that an unsuccessful election candidate's claim for damages was not barred by abuse of process or collateral attack doctrines, and that the election official was not protected by statutory immunity or parliamentary privilege. The justices also differed on the availability of loss of chance damages in the electoral context.
-
Patentability of Methods of Medical Treatment: MMT Doctrine Affirmed in Janssen v Pharmascience, 2026 SCC 26
|
In Janssen v Pharmascience 2026 SCC 26 [Janssen], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) affirmed the methods of medical treatment (“MMT”) doctrine in patent law, confirming that MMTs are unpatentable subject matter in Canadian Law under s. 2 of the Patent Act, RSC, 1985, c P-4 [the Act]. Though this has been the state of the law for over 50 years, two judges disagreed on this point, arguing that since the repeal of s. 41(1) of the Act in 1993, there has been no statutory basis for a blanket prohibition on the patentability of MMTs.
-
Asking "What If?": Judicial Hypotheticals in Quebec (AG) v Denis, 2026 SCC 25
|
“What if?” is a question rooted in curiosity. Hypotheticals are a valuable tool for constitutional analysis that may allow courts to test the limits of legislation beyond the facts before them. However, balancing an individual’s Charter rights with statutory interpretation raises an important question: should there be parameters of a hypothetical scenario analyzed by the