Passer au contenu
Home     À propos de la Cour     Décisions de la Cour

Décisions de la Cour

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® QuicklawMC, et WestlawNextMDMD 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

  • 2026-02-02 Eklund v. Victoria Gold Corporation, 2026 ONSC 554 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Procedure — Intervention — Class actions — Whether proposed intervenor should be granted participatory status — Discretion under Class Proceedings Act, 1992, s. 14(1) exercised against intervention — Parallel British Columbia action and alleged cost savings not part of funding approval analysis — Intervention refused
    Procedure — Class proceedings funding — Approval under Class Proceedings Act, 1992, s. 33.1 — Does ATE insurance agreement meet statutory criteria? — Plaintiff retains control, confidentiality and deemed undertaking maintained, funders financially able — Premium and indemnity terms fair and reasonable, comparable approvals referenced — Funding agreement approved
    Procedure — Costs — Motion to intervene — Whether costs payable by unsuccessful proposed intervenor — Indemnity and reasonable expectations under Rules 57.01(1)(0.a) and 57.01(1)(0.b) considered — Amount sought within foreseeable range given stakes and vigorous response — Costs fixed and awarded
  • 2026-01-30 R. v. Rai, 2026 ONSC 567 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Procedure — Criminal appeals — Sufficiency of reasons — Whether trial reasons adequately addressed s. 10(b) Charter and credibility — Functional approach to reasons applied, R. v. R.E.M., Dinardo, G.F. — Deference to trial findings, no palpable and overriding error — Meaningful appellate review not foreclosed — Conviction appeal dismissed
    Rights and freedoms — Charter of Rights — Right to counsel, s. 10(b) — Do police have to provide private, direct third‑party calls or detainee phone access to obtain counsel of choice? — Clarification of facilitation duty, Kumarasamy distinguished, Edwards applied — Reasonable efforts may include police contacting third party — No s. 10(b) breach — Conviction appeal dismissed
    Procedure — Sentencing — Notice of harsher sentence — Whether sentencing judge exceeded Crown position without adequate notice under Nahanee — Bench signalled concerns that Crown’s proposals were too low — Opportunity for submissions provided, not mere vague concerns — No reversible error in notice or reasons — Sentence appeal dismissed
    Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Fitness of sentence — Is the cumulative custodial sentence demonstrably unfit or impacted by error in principle? — Emphasis on deterrence for impaired and stunt driving — Range analysis, proportionality implicitly considered, Lacasse and Friesen referenced — Consecutive sentence for HTA per POA s. 64 — Leave granted, sentence appeal dismissed
  • 2026-01-30 Lacaria v. Lacaria, 2026 ONSC 591 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Procedure — Costs — Moot proceeding — Whether the court may award costs where no adjudication occurred — s. 131(1) Courts of Justice Act considered — Court declines to conduct a “phantom trial” — Costs are incidental to determination of rights — Jurisdiction to award costs in settled matters affirmed — Parties otherwise to bear their own costs — Jurisdiction affirmed
    Natural persons — Capacity and guardianship — Substitute Decisions Act — Should costs of a statutory guardianship application be paid from the incapable person’s estate? — Best interests and benefit to the person applied — Agreements on care and PSWs found beneficial — Rigorous scrutiny of claims against estate per Fiacco and Ziskos — Costs payable from Estate
    Procedure — Costs — Fixing quantum — What amount is fair, reasonable, and proportionate under Rule 57.01? — Post‑death costs to pursue costs claim unreasonable — Two‑thirds fees incurred for costs recovery criticised — Reasonable hourly rates but excessive time — Step‑back assessment applied per Apotex and 100 Bloor — Costs fixed at $12,000 payable from Estate
  • 2026-01-30 R. v. Kazumba, 2026 ONSC 606 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Evidence — Criminal records — Co-accused — Whether co-accused may adduce the other co-accused’s record where prejudice substantially outweighs probative value — Canada Evidence Act, s. 12(1), Corbett, King — Pollock and Seaboyer on defence-led bad character — Similarity to firearm offences heightening propensity risk — Limited credibility value — Record excluded
    Evidence — Character of deceased — Self-defence — Are the deceased’s criminal record and related occurrence reports admissible to support inferences on threats and initial aggression? — Scopelliti applied, probative value not substantially outweighed — Varga caution addressed by limiting instruction — Patterson context considered — One separate occurrence report double hearsay — Evidence admitted in part
    Evidence — Hearsay — Police synopses and occurrence reports without convictions — Are synopses admissible to “level the playing field”? — Hearsay and unreliability concerns per Burton, Williams, Downey — Presumption of innocence emphasised in Krasniqi — Risk of distracting the jury per Jackson — Evidence excluded
  • 2026-01-30 Re: 1000156489 ONTARIO INC, 2026 ONSC 610 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Bankruptcy and insolvency — CCAA distributions — Liquidating CCAA proceeding — Whether distribution by the Monitor under extended powers is fair and reasonable — Approval of Eleventh Report and professional fees, including counsel — Holdback for final administrative costs proposed — Distribution to unsecured creditors authorised — Same entity to make distributions without conversion — Distribution and fees approved
    Taxation — Representative liability — Statutory withholding obligations — Whether the Monitor can be exempted from Income Tax Act s. 159, Excise Tax Act s. 270, EI Act s. 86, CPP s. 23 and provincial tax laws — No basis in evidence or law to grant exemption — Paramountcy and inapplicability not established — Revisit on notice to taxation authorities — Exemption refused
    Bankruptcy and insolvency — Stays — CCAA supervision — Whether the stay of proceedings should be extended in a liquidating CCAA — Monitor carrying the proceeding in good faith and with due diligence — Conversion to receivership or bankruptcy declined as wasteful — Fair and reasonable to extend the stay as sought by the Monitor — Stay extended

Cour divisionnaire - Décisions récentes

  • 2026-01-30 Aayushi v. Sareen, 2026 ONSC 476 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: costs — outline — writing — motion — leave
  • 2026-01-30 2610832 Ontario Inc. v. City of Niagara Falls, 2026 ONSC 479 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: outline — costs — writing — motion — neither
  • 2026-01-30 Mawashi v. Elkhaiat, 2026 ONSC 477 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: inclusive — fixed — writing — motion — leave
  • 2026-01-30 Sutherland Law Professional Corp. v. Coccimiglio, 2026 ONSC 602 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Administrative law — Judicial review — Interlocutory Small Claims Court orders — Whether judicial review lies where appeal is restricted — Application that is an appeal by a different name — Scope of review limited to excess of jurisdiction or procedural fairness — Courts of Justice Act, s. 31, Judicial Review Procedure Act, s. 2 — Serious issue threshold barely met
    Procedure — Stays — Interlocutory relief pending judicial review — RJR‑MacDonald framework applied — Whether a stay should issue pending review of order setting aside default judgment — Serious issue, irreparable harm, balance of convenience analysed — Interests of justice considered — Stay refused
    Procedure — Interlocutory injunctions — Irreparable harm — Judgment‑proof risk and execution before judgment — Whether harm quantifiable in money — Request for security for a judgment not yet obtained — Exceptional remedy not warranted absent compelling evidence — Insufficient basis for pre‑judgment execution — Stay refused
    Procedure — Interlocutory injunctions — Balance of convenience — Competing prejudice assessed — Security for unproven judgment versus respondent’s access to lawfully held funds — Small Claims Court mandate for summary resolution considered — Balance clearly favouring respondent — Motion dismissed
  • 2026-01-29 Taghva v. MLYM INC., 2026 ONSC 401 (CanLII)
    Mots-clés: Lease and tenancy — Termination for illegal act — Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, s. 61(1) — Whether LTB erred in finding an “illegal act” without proof — Facts in notices of termination admitted through counsel — Conviction not required under s. 75 — Guilty plea to lesser offence and conditional discharge noted — No legal error shown — Appeal dismissed
    Lease and tenancy — Serious impairment of safety — Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, s. 66(1) — Whether conduct “seriously impaired the safety” without proof or witness testimony — Photographs of tenant holding what appeared to be a gun — Tenant’s testimony acknowledging threatening manner — Serious impairment includes risk of impairment per Divisional Court — No legal error shown — Appeal dismissed
    Procedure — Appeals from LTB — Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, s. 210 — Whether issues raised are questions of law — Standard of review for questions of law is correctness — Admissions at hearing cannot be challenged on appeal — Alleged misrepresentation by counsel unsupported — No errors of law demonstrated — Appeal dismissed

Autres liens utiles: