Home » Page 5

Posts

Kohli v Thom: Relocation, Family Violence, and the Limits of Income Imputation

In Kohli v Thom, the Court of Appeal for Ontario tackled two recurring flashpoints in modern family litigation: (1) whether a parent who has survived intimate-partner violence may relocate with a young child over the objection of the other parent; and (2) how a court should treat the survivor’s earning capacity when assessing child and spousal support.

R v JW: Programming-Based Sentencing, “Wrongful Conduct,” and Enhanced Credit

The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v JW addresses two intertwined controversies in Canadian sentencing law. First, it clarifies whether—and how—a sentencing judge may take account of the time an offender is likely to need to complete institutional programming when setting a custodial term. Second, it refines the meaning of “wrongful conduct” for the purpose of denying enhanced pre-sentence credit under s 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code.

Texting Impersonations: SCC Weighs Digital Privacy in R v Campbell

In R v. Campbell, 2024 SCC 42 (“Campbell”), the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) weighed in on whether the police had lawful authority to use the cellphone of a drug dealer without a warrant to continue a text message conversation with an alleged drug distributor. In a 6-3 split, the SCC held that while there was a violation of section 8 of the Charter and Rights and Freedoms [“Charter”], the warrantless search of Mr. Campbell was justified under the exigent circumstances exception outlined in section 11(7) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”).

Appeal Watch: Can’t Talk to Your Head of State? SCC to rule on Unilingual Lieutenant Governors in New Brunswick in Acadian Society

In the Acadian Society of New Brunswick v The Right Honorable Prime Minister of Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) will decide whether the Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick must be bilingual [41398].  Overturning the decision by the Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick (“NBQB”), the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick (“NBCA”) ruled in the Right Honourable Prime Minister of Canada et al v. La Société de l’Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick 2024 NBCA 70 (“SANB” ) that the appointment did not contravene the Charter's language provisions.

Flying Fair? SCC Weighs in on International Air Transportation Association v Canada

Airline passengers in Canada recently scored an important win regarding consumer protection. In International Air Transportation Association v Canada (Transportation Agency), 2024 SCC 30 [International Air], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) unanimously held that the Canada Transportation Agency’s (the “Agency”) Air Passenger Protection Regulations, SOR/2019-150 [Regulations] were valid regulations that did not violate the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, 2242 UNTS 309 [Montreal Convention].

Intentions Matter: Excluding Liability for Statutorily Implied Conditions in Earthco v Pine Valley

In Earthco Soil Mixtures Inc v Pine Valley Enterprises Inc, 2024 SCC 20 [Earthco], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) affirmed that common law principles of contractual interpretation apply to exclusion clauses under the Sale of Goods Act, RSO 1990, c S1 [SGA]. While “express agreement” sufficient to oust SGA liability must include an explicit statement of joint intention, it does not require precise legal terminology or “magic words” (Earthco, para 98).

APPEAL WATCH: Forfeiture Of Offence-Related Property Explored In Nguyen

The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) is set to hear the appeal of Nguyen c. Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions, 2024 QCCA 674 [Nguyen] where the Court of Appeal of Québec (“QCCA”) overturned the decision of the Court of Québec, which held that it had jurisdiction to hear the application of the prosecution [41400].

APPEAL WATCH: Revisiting the admissibility of similar fact evidence in R v Chizanga

The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) will soon hear the appeal of R v Chizanga, 2024 ONCA 545 [Chizanga], in which it will opine on the principles of admitting evidence of prior discreditable conduct [41405].  Building upon the seminal case of R v Handy, 2002 SCC 56 [Handy] which set out the principles for the admissibility of such evidence, this appeal […]