Une série de jugements de la Cour supérieure de justice, pour la plupart rendus après le 1er octobre 2004, sont affichés sur le site Web de CanLII. Ce site n’est pas une source exhaustive de jugements de la Cour supérieure de justice. La version officielle des motifs de jugement est le document original signé ou l’endossement manuscrit dans le dossier de la Cour. S’il y a une question concernant le contenu d’un jugement, le document original dans le dossier de la Cour l’emporte.

Les jugements ne sont disponibles que dans la langue dans laquelle ils ont été rédigés.

On peut obtenir des copies des jugements de la Cour supérieure de justice en contactant les greffes respectifs où l’affaire a été entendue. Des frais de photocopie sont requis. On peut consulter ces jugements en s’abonnant à un service comme LexisNexis® Quicklaw^MC, et WestlawNextMD^MD Canada.

Abonnez-vous au fil de nouvelles RSS afin de consulter les décisions de la Cour supérieure de justice

• Cour supérieure de justice – Décisions récentes
• Cour supérieure de justice – Cour divisionnaire – Décisions récentes

Cour supérieure de justice – Décisions récentes

• 2026-01-13 Desormeaux v. Oloka, 2026 ONSC 162 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Business associations — Derivative actions — Leave to commence — CBCA, s. 239 — Whether leave should be granted to commence a derivative action — Notice provided, good faith established, and action in the interests of the corporation — Corporate gridlock and risk of bankruptcy considered — Allegations of negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract arguable — Leave granted
  Business associations — Corporate remedies — Legal fees in derivative actions — CBCA, s. 241(d) — Should the Company pay the Applicant’s reasonable legal fees for the derivative action? — Court’s discretion to order interim funding — Fees to be paid until the action is finally decided — Costs determination deferred to trial — Order for reasonable legal fees made
• 2026-01-13 R v. Jamar Bailey, 2026 ONSC 253 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Criminal procedure — Abuse of process — Post‑verdict motion bifurcated to determine whether police stole money — Whether accused proved police theft during execution of a search warrant — Standard of proof on a balance of probabilities — Reference to R. v. Mack on timing of abuse claims — Abuse of process motion dismissed
  Evidence — Credibility — Assessment of testimony on alleged cash theft — Vague and inconsistent evidence from household witness weighed against officers’ denials — Exact cash amounts and storage details found implausible — Whether evidentiary record sufficient to establish police misconduct — No direct or circumstantial support for theft — Abuse of process motion dismissed
• 2026-01-13 Campbell v Grand Bovino Inc., 2026 ONSC 257 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Summary judgment — Simplified procedure — Is this an appropriate case for summary judgment under rr. 20.01 and 20.04? — Serious material credibility disputes on inducement and bonus entitlement — Hryniak v Mauldin applied, Singh v Concept Plastics considered — Paper record insufficient to reach fair and just determination — Proportionate, expeditious resolution requires trial — Motion dismissed
  Evidence — Admissibility — Cross-examinations on affidavits — Are cross-examinations on affidavits on a motion under the simplified procedure prohibited and resultant evidence inadmissible? — Rule 76.04(1) prohibition unqualified — Cross-examination transcripts disregarded — No jurisprudential basis to limit rule to interlocutory motions — Evidence obtained in breach excluded — Evidence excluded
  Procedure — Case management — Enhanced powers and directions — Should the court exercise enhanced fact-finding powers under r. 20.04 or make directions under r. 20.05? — Expanded fact-finding declined as not avoiding trial and risking further delay — Directions to move matter to timely and efficient trial — TBST attendance to address next steps ordered — Matter sent to trial
• 2026-01-12 Pedersen v. Hillier-Shepherd, 2026 ONSC 203 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Pre-trial conferences — Mode of hearing — Presumptive in-person hearings in Owen Sound and Walkerton — Do counsel’s travel, convenience, winter driving, or childcare amount to clear and compelling reasons? — Adherence to regional practice direction emphasised — Clients not required to attend, availability by video or phone — Remote hearing request denied
  Procedure — Case management — Rules 50.06 and 50.13 — Whether the judge may relax settlement discussion requirement and convert to a case conference limited to trial-scheduling and trial management — Option of 30-minute video conference if all parties consent — Conference judge retains discretion to order a further conference — Conversion permitted
  Procedure — Scheduling — Pre-trial conference length and timing — Should start time and duration be varied to balance counsel logistics and court resources? — Start time changed to 12 noon — Duration reduced to one hour — Parties may reschedule through the trial coordinator — Conference time adjusted
• 2026-01-12 Argyle v. Dickinson, 2026 ONSC 207 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Costs on motions — Interlocutory pleadings motion, Rule 57.03 — Whether to award costs to the successful moving party on a motion to strike — Presumptive entitlement to partial indemnity considered — Effect of success characterised as pyrrhic — Costs linked to ultimate trial success — Costs fixed at $20,000, payable in the cause
  Procedure — Costs fixation versus deferral — Rule 57.03 discretion, Sea Vision Marine — Should costs be fixed now or deferred to trial — Framework for postponing disposition of motion costs — Distinction between costs in the cause and conditional entitlement — Approach adapted to justice of the case — Costs fixed now with entitlement contingent on trial outcome
  Procedure — Scale and quantum of costs — Proportionality, Boucher — What partial indemnity scale and amount are reasonable — Excessive expenditures for technical pleadings motion reduced — Reasonableness assessed against complexity and efficiency — Partial indemnity fixed globally for fairness and affordability — Partial indemnity costs fixed at $20,000
  Procedure — Success on motions — Pleadings and particulars, striking with leave — Whether limited success justifies a costs award — Practical impact of amendments and particulars weighed — Success recognised but tempered by tactical nature and over-pleading — Entitlement conditioned on defendants’ ultimate success at trial — Costs fixed at $20,000, payable in the cause

Cour divisionnaire - Décisions récentes

• 2026-01-13 LIUNA v. Dennis, 2026 ONSC 70 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Procedural fairness — Motions — Deciding on a basis not pleaded — Whether deciding under r. 3.02 when only r. 59.06 was pleaded breached fairness — Requirement to state relief, grounds and rules, r. 37.06 — Authorities on deciding within pleadings’ boundaries, Colautti, Rodaro, Nicholls — Lack of notice of prejudice issue found unfair — Appeal allowed
  Procedure — Extensions of time — Amended pleadings — Whether extension could be granted without notice and without a draft amended statement of claim — Motion judge relied on prejudice without parties’ evidence — No draft pleading to assess prejudice — Court’s preference for merits does not cure surprise — Order granting extension under r. 3.02 set aside
  Procedure — Appeals — Remedies — Appropriate remedy for breach of procedural fairness — Motion remitted to a different motion judge — Directions that respondent include draft amended statement of claim — Appellants permitted to file evidence of prejudice — Costs fixed for leave motion and appeal — Motion remitted to different judge
• 2026-01-13 Regional Municipality of York v 2090396 Ontario Ltd., 2026 ONSC 195 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Intervention — Friends of the court — Rule 13.02 — Whether leave to intervene as a friend of the court should be granted in a private dispute — Factors from Peel v. Great Atlantic considered — Motion heard in writing — Heavier burden in private litigation applied — Leave to intervene refused — Motion dismissed without costs
  Procedure — Intervention — Usefulness and distinct contribution — Whether the proposed intervenors would make a useful and distinct contribution not otherwise offered by the parties — Submissions duplicative of appellant’s material — Jones v. Tsige on repetition — No materially different legal submission explained — Leave to intervene denied — Motion dismissed without costs
  Procedure — Intervention — Injustice or undue delay — Whether the intervention would cause injustice to the parties or undue delay — Proposed capital planning submissions would broaden and complicate the appeal — Distort the focus of the appeal — Concerns unrelated to York Region’s scheme — Leave refused — Motion dismissed without costs
  Procedure — Intervention — Nature of case and issues — Private dispute under the Expropriations Act — Whether issues raise public policy or novel issues of law — Issues essentially fact driven — Lynch and Paciorka referenced as context — Enhanced burden not met — Leave to intervene denied — Motion dismissed without costs
• 2026-01-13 City of Ottawa v. MacEwen Petroleum Inc., 2025 ONSC 6955 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Statutory interpretation — Expropriations Act — Interest on costs — Whether the Tribunal could order interest on costs from a date before its order — Scope of s. 32 on “reasonable” costs and s. 33 on interest for market value and injurious affection — Interaction with CJA s. 128 and s. 129 — Interest only from costs order date — Appeal allowed
  Statutory interpretation — Courts of Justice Act — Prejudgment and post-judgment interest — Does s. 130(1)(c) permit interest on costs before a costs order despite s. 128(4)(c)? — Application of s. 129(1) to tribunal costs awards — Reliance on Yemec and Tripp to confine interest start date — Settlement date not operative under s. 129 — Appeal allowed
  Administrative law — Appeals — Standard of review — Appeal from Ontario Land Tribunal under Expropriations Act s. 31 — Correctness standard on question of law per Vavilov — Did the Tribunal err in law by awarding interest without statutory authority? — Tribunal’s reasoning not supported by governing statutes — Interest to run from order date — Appeal allowed
• 2026-01-12 Cai Song v. Ontario Labour Relations Board, 2026 ONSC 165 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Administrative law — Judicial review — Standard of review and reasonableness — Presumption of reasonableness under Vavilov applied — Whether Board’s credibility findings and evidentiary assessment were unreasonable — Court refrains from reweighing evidence and defers to first instance decision maker — Turkiewicz cited on standard — Decision coherent and justified under Vavilov — Application dismissed
  Administrative law — Procedural fairness — Baker factors — Whether applicant was denied an opportunity to make submissions on defamation and harassment — Availability of reconsideration under LRA s.114(1) and Information Bulletin 19 — Challenge premature where remedies before Board not pursued — Minor typographical errors not impacting fairness — Procedural fairness owed and met — Application dismissed
  Administrative law — Jurisdiction — Board’s findings on defamation and harassment — Whether correctness review applies to general jurisdictional questions — Vavilov para. 65 rejects correctness on such questions — Board used “defamatory” colloquially and made obiter comments on harassment — No adjudication of tort or Code liability — Decision within jurisdiction — Application dismissed
  Procedure — Costs — Self‑represented litigants — Whether costs should be awarded against impecunious, self‑represented applicant — Court’s responsibility for fair access does not entail consequence‑free litigation — Costs as tool to prevent abuse of process — Floryan v. Luke cited — Application lacked merit and reconsideration not pursued — Costs awarded to employer in reduced amount — Costs awarded
• 2026-01-12 Air Canada v. Landry, 2026 ONSC 222 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Transportation — Air passenger protection — Delay compensation under APPR — Whether s. 19(1)(a)(iii) applies absent an offer of alternative travel arrangements — Interplay of ss. 12, 17 and 19 considered — Refund under s. 17(2) requires carrier’s offer of alternatives — No alternative travel arrangements found — Standardised compensation of $1,000 correctly awarded — Appeal dismissed
  International law — Carriage by air — Montreal Convention — Article 19 delay liability — Are damages for “breach of contract” barred where damages flow from delay? — Meaning of delay and “reasonable delay” argued — Measures reasonably required not proven by carrier — Article 22 limit respected — Damages flowing from delay upheld — Appeal dismissed
  Procedure — Appeals — Small Claims Court — Divisional Court jurisdiction — Courts of Justice Act, s. 31(a) — Is the prescribed monetary threshold assessed per individual plaintiff or in aggregate? — Distinct claims and separate enforceable orders emphasised — Threshold applies to each plaintiff — No appeal lies for awards under the limit — Appeal dismissed