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

• 2025-11-12 The Bank of Nova Scotia v. Old Green Inc. et al., 2025 ONSC 6191 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Bankruptcy and insolvency — Appointment of receiver — Default under loan agreement — Secured indebtedness — Respondents in breach of mortgage terms and general security agreements — Property taxes outstanding — Just and convenient standard for appointing a receiver — Does the applicant have a contractual right to appoint a receiver? — Governing principles under Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, s. 243(1), and Courts of Justice Act, s. 101
  Civil procedure — Transfer of proceedings — Practice directions — Rules of Civil Procedure — Respondents sought transfer of application to Central West Region — Whether procedural requirements for transfer were met — Onus on moving party to demonstrate transfer is in the interest of justice — Rule 13.1.02(2) factors applied holistically — Forum shopping discouraged — Consolidated Civil Provincial Practice Direction, Provincial Practice Direction, Central South Practice Direction
  Property — Mortgage claims — Receivership applications — Rule 13.1.01(3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure — Whether rule applies to receivership applications involving mortgage claims — Designated counties for mortgage proceedings — No determination made due to lack of full argument — Central South and Central West Practice Directions
  Statutory interpretation — Rules of Civil Procedure — Interpretation of Rule 13.1.01(3) — Whether receivership applications fall within the scope of mortgage-related claims under the rule — Principles of statutory interpretation raised but not fully argued — No binding precedent identified
• 2025-11-10 Caringi v. Caringi et al, 2025 ONSC 6268 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Family — Matrimonial home — Partition and sale — Spousal support — Equalization of net family property — Husband sought partition and sale of the matrimonial home to fund legal expenses and support payments — Wife opposed sale, claiming prejudice to her claims for exclusive possession and vesting order — Does the sale prejudice the Wife’s rights under the Family Law Act? — Test for prejudice and competing interests under the Family Law Act and Partition Act
  Evidence — Financial disclosure — Prima facie case — Wife alleged Husband failed to disclose assets and income relevant to equalization and spousal support claims — Husband argued financial disclosure was adequate per prior court ruling — Did the Wife establish a prima facie case for a vesting order based on existing financial disclosure? — Standard for prima facie case in family law disputes
  Family — Procedural fairness — Partition and sale — Wife included partition and sale in her application as alternative relief — Husband argued Wife was precluded from resisting sale due to her pleadings — Does inclusion of partition and sale in pleadings preclude opposition to such relief? — Court held Wife’s alternative claim did not preclude her from resisting the motion
• 2025-11-10 Eringate Homes Corp. v. Maniaci, 2025 ONSC 6252 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Civil procedure — Discovery motions — Refusals and undertakings — Proportionality and relevance — Over 140 discovery questions in dispute — Court's role in case management to resolve discovery disputes — Should the court enforce compliance with proportionality and relevance principles under the Rules of Civil Procedure? — Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, rr. 1.04, 29.2.03, 31.06
  Evidence — Solicitor-client privilege — Waiver of privilege — Discovery motions — Plaintiffs sought documents and communications allegedly subject to privilege — Whether privilege should be upheld or waived for specific documents central to the litigation — Solicitor-client privilege as a fundamental principle — Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary, 2016 SCC 53
  Professional responsibility — Discovery obligations — Refusals and undertakings — Counsel's duty to ensure compliance with discovery rules — Whether parties made sufficient efforts to resolve discovery disputes before motions — Court's role in addressing non-compliance with discovery obligations — Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, rr. 1.04, 31.06
  Torts — Misrepresentation — Breach of trust — Unjust enrichment — Financial records and accounting — Plaintiffs alleged misuse of $1,000,000 Program Fee — Whether financial statements, tax returns, and accounting records should be produced to address allegations — Relevance and proportionality of financial disclosure in tort claims
  Evidence — Litigation privilege — Scope of privilege — Communications before litigation — Whether litigation privilege applies to communications created before formal commencement of litigation — Dominant purpose test for litigation privilege — Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, 2016 SCC 52
• 2025-11-10 Paunovski v. Risteski et al., 2025 ONSC 6260 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Civil procedure — Leave to bring motion — Rule 48.04 — Plaintiff set action down for trial before bringing motion for interlocutory Mareva injunction — Whether leave should be granted despite procedural error — Interests of justice and absence of prejudice to defendants considered — Flexible approach to granting leave under Rule 48.04 — Disjunctive test for substantial change in circumstances or necessity in the interests of justice
  Torts — Fraud — Mareva injunction — Plaintiff alleged fraud and misrepresentation by defendant inducing investments — Test for interlocutory Mareva injunction — Strong prima facie case, assets in jurisdiction, and risk of dissipation required — Defendant’s credibility issues and unexplained financial transactions supported finding of fraud — Mareva injunction granted against primary defendant
  Evidence — Full and fair disclosure — Ex parte motion — Plaintiff’s obligation to disclose material facts on ex parte motion for interim Mareva injunction — Defendants alleged non-disclosure of affidavits and financial documents — Court found omissions immaterial to outcome — Test for materiality of omitted facts in ex parte proceedings
  Obligations — Knowing receipt — Corporate and spousal liability — Plaintiff alleged co-defendants knowingly received or assisted in fraudulent misappropriation of funds — No evidence of funds deposited with corporate entity or spousal involvement in fraudulent scheme — Strong prima facie case not established against co-defendants — Mareva injunction dismissed as to co-defendants
• 2025-11-07 Stajic v. Wayland Group and Ward, 2025 ONSC 6233 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Civil procedure — Mareva Injunction — Risk of dissipation of assets — Defendant evading service and relocating assets internationally — Plaintiffs seeking to freeze assets to secure potential judgment — Should a Mareva Injunction be granted to prevent the dissipation of assets? — Governing principles for granting Mareva Injunctions, including risk of asset removal and irreparable harm
  Securities — Ontario Securities Act — Allegations of securities fraud — Defendant’s undisclosed financial interests in corporate transactions — Defendant acquiescing to Ontario Securities Commission allegations — Should a Mareva Injunction be granted to address risks arising from securities fraud? — Ontario Securities Act, RSO 1990, c. S.5
  Civil procedure — Norwich Order — Disclosure of financial records — Plaintiffs seeking records from financial institutions to trace defendant’s asset movements — Should a Norwich Order be issued to compel disclosure of financial records? — Test for granting Norwich Orders, including necessity and relevance of requested information
  Evidence — Ex parte orders — Issuance without notice — Plaintiffs relying on extensive documentary evidence to justify ex parte relief — Defendant’s history of evasion and default — Does the evidence justify the issuance of an ex parte order? — Principles governing ex parte orders, including sufficiency of evidence and urgency

Cour divisionnaire - Décisions récentes

• 2025-11-07 Hogg v. Chief Executive Officer, 2025 ONSC 6214 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Securities — Definition of "security" — Cryptocurrency tokens — Investment contracts — Whether cryptocurrency tokens constituted a "security" under the Securities Act — Application of the common enterprise test from Pacific Coast Coin Exchange — Reasonable expectations of profit and reliance on the efforts of others — Tokens not inherently securities but part of an investment scheme — Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5
  Securities — Fraud — Misrepresentation — Misappropriation of investor funds — False claims about gold backing cryptocurrency tokens — Misleading promotional materials — Use of investor funds for purposes other than disclosed — Panel finding of two fraudulent schemes: gold title fraud and misappropriation of funds — Whether the Panel erred in finding fraud — Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5
  Evidence — Admissibility — Compelled interviews — Section 9 of the Evidence Act — Whether compelled testimony from an investigation could be admitted in a regulatory proceeding — Distinction between investigative and adjudicative stages under the Securities Act — Regulatory purpose of securities investigations — Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.23, s. 9
  Administrative law — Procedural fairness — Adjournment motion — Denial of adjournment request — Exceptional circumstances test under Tribunal Rules — Withdrawal of counsel and preparation time for self-represented litigant — Diligence in compelling foreign witnesses — Whether denial of adjournment was procedurally unfair — Tribunal Rules of Procedure and Forms, Rule 29(1)
  Business associations — Directors and officers — Definition under the Securities Act — Whether the appellant was a "directing mind" of Arbitrade Bermuda — Share ownership and control — Application of the functional approach to determine director or officer status — Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5
• 2025-11-07 Green v. Ontario (Human Rights Tribunal), 2025 ONSC 6223 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Administrative law — Judicial review — Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario — Section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code — Tribunal dismissed human rights complaint based on prior Police Services Act proceeding — Did the Tribunal reasonably apply its discretion under section 45.1? — Standard of review of reasonableness — Tribunal's failure to justify departure from established jurisprudence — Decision set aside and remitted to a different adjudicator
  Rights and freedoms — Human rights complaints — Racial profiling — Section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code — Tribunal dismissed complaint on the basis that another proceeding appropriately dealt with the substance of the application — Did the Tribunal unreasonably fail to apply principles of fairness established in Penner v. Niagara? — Balancing finality in litigation with fairness to complainants
  Evidence — Administrative decisions — Departure from precedent — Tribunal dismissed human rights complaint based on findings in a Police Services Act proceeding — Tribunal failed to meaningfully address fairness concerns or justify departure from its own jurisprudence — Transparency, intelligibility, and justification of reasons required under Vavilov
  Constitution — Fairness in administrative proceedings — Issue estoppel — Use of Police Services Act findings to preclude human rights complaints — Different purposes, processes, and stakes between proceedings — Standard of proof differences — Whether applying section 45.1 undermines fairness and access to remedies under the Human Rights Code
• 2025-11-07 Boothe v. Social Benefits Tribunal et al, 2025 ONSC 6229 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: proceed by zoom — peremptory — adjourning — today — reserved
• 2025-11-06 Paradigm Change Consulting Inc. v. Boparai, 2025 ONSC 6099 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Civil procedure — Leave to appeal — Costs — Motion for leave to appeal decision of Agarwal J. dismissed — Moving Party ordered to pay costs to Responding Party in the amount of $5,000 all-inclusive — Should leave to appeal be granted? — What is the appropriate costs award? — Governing principles for granting leave to appeal and awarding costs in civil motions
• 2025-11-06 Elkin Injury Law, Barristers, P.C. v. Smith, 2025 ONSC 6100 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: inclusive — fixed — writing — motion — leave