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

• 2026-08-13 Laberge Gareau v. Laberge Gareau, 2026 ONSC 4669 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Limitation periods — Real Property Limitations Act — Discoverability and postponement — Whether claim to recover land is barred under s. 4 — Application of s. 5(1) possession and receipt of profits — Continuous possession and receipt of rents and profits established — Brown v. Meunier considered on discoverability — Limitation held not commenced or began in 2017 — Claim not statute barred
  Trusts — Resulting trusts — Presumption of advancement — Did Michele retain beneficial ownership of the remaining property despite trust wording? — Pecore applied to parent–child transfer and advancement rebutted — Contemporaneous reporting letter supported intention to retain beneficial ownership — Use of land, payment of mortgage and expenses weighed — Resulting trust declared
  Civil liability — Unjust enrichment — Remedy — Was enrichment without juristic reason proven and what remedy is appropriate? — Kerr v. Baranow framework applied to labour and equipment contributions — Benefits of room and board and tax losses considered — Constructive trust refused for lack of causal link to land — Quantum meruit calculated — Monetary award ordered
  Property — Proprietary estoppel — Assurances and reliance — Whether unambiguous promise regarding the farm was made and reasonably relied upon — Cowper-Smith test applied — Vague statements such as this will all be yours someday insufficient — No clear representation, no detrimental reliance established — Proprietary estoppel claim dismissed
• 2026-08-13 Tirecraft Ontario Inc. v. Mann Tire Ltd., 2026 ONSC 4678 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Default judgment — Setting aside judgment — Mountain View Farms Ltd. v. McQueen factors — Whether interests of justice favour relief — Strong preference to decide matters on their merits — Default judgment amount far exceeding claim considered — Prejudice to the Defendants assessed — Integrity of the administration of justice engaged — Default judgment set aside
  Procedure — Solicitors — Removal from record — Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 15.04 — Effect of deficient order removing counsel on party defaults — Cunningham v. Hutchings applied to mandatory wording — Whether striking defence and default were irregularly obtained — Plausible explanation for non‑participation established — Noting in default set aside
  Procedure — Appeals and motions — Promptness — Whether the motion was brought promptly after learning of default judgment — TELUS Communications Inc. v. Marche and Snell v. SUGI Financial Services Inc. considered — Reasonable fact‑finding before moving accepted — Delay not so inordinate as to outweigh other factors — Motion permitted to proceed
  Procedure — Enforcement — Consequential relief — Whether writs may stand once default judgment is set aside — Leaf Homes Limited v. Khan applied — Revival of Statement of Defence and Counterclaim directed — Costs thrown away to be addressed by submissions — Writs lifted and pleadings revived
• 2026-08-13 R. v. Douglas et al., 2026 ONSC 4689 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Constitution — Charter of Rights — Search and seizure — Reasonable grounds — Whether ITO disclosed a nexus between alleged trafficking and Britannia — Temporal proximity to suspected transactions assessed — Versadex residency notation considered — Reliance on R. v. Sadikov and proximity cases distinguished — Absence of affiant belief regarding storage at Britannia — Warrant facially deficient — Section 8 breach found
  Evidence — Exclusion of evidence — Charter s. 24(2) — Threshold “obtained in a manner” met — Whether admitting drugs would bring the administration of justice into disrepute — Serious drafting defects and reckless disregard found — Significant impact on privacy in a dwelling — Grant framework reaffirmed in R. v. Fox applied — Society’s interest did not outweigh breaches — Evidence excluded
• 2026-08-12 R. v. Ali, 2026 ONSC 4593 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Rights and freedoms — Charter — Search and seizure — Whether there was a reasonable expectation of privacy in condominium elevator CCTV — Section 8 engaged by warrantless seizure of Video — Common areas, visibility of cameras, likelihood of police access considered — Subject matter narrow, no biographical core — No reasonable expectation of privacy — Charter s. 8 not engaged — Application dismissed
  Procedure — Search warrants — Information to obtain — Whether ITO with paragraph 34a provided reasonable and probable grounds under Criminal Code, s. 487(1) — Photographs from elevator Video linking clothing before and after robbery — Context of investigation and corroborating Ronson Video — Presumptively valid order upheld — Warrant valid
  Procedure — Informations to obtain — Amplification — Can the Crown amplify the ITO with affiant’s evidence about consent from on‑duty security guard? — Evidence of interaction with security described — Insufficient basis to establish valid third‑party consent — Amplification unnecessary to sustain warrant — Warrant stands
  Rights and freedoms — Charter remedies — Exclusion of evidence — If s. 8 breach found, should Video and seized items be excluded under s. 24(2)? — Grant factors applied — Belief in authority of security guard, absence of bad faith, minor breach — Real evidence important to adjudication on the merits — Evidence admitted
• 2026-08-12 TD Bank v. 1633092 Ontario Ltd., 2026 ONSC 4620 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Contracts — Damages — Causation and remoteness — Was the Bank’s failure to advance the full CSBFL the effective cause of 163’s losses? — Expectation interest and effective cause applied (Bank of America, Sunrise Sunset) — Uncollectible related‑party loan and insufficient equity found — Profitability assumptions reduced and valuation critiques accepted — Damages nil
  Contracts — Guarantees and shareholders — Honest performance and negligent misrepresentation — Can guarantors and shareholders claim despite guarantees and the rule in Foss v. Harbottle? — Waivers of duty, set‑off and negligence in guarantees enforced — No special circumstances or dishonest performance established — Separate shareholder claims not maintainable — Claims dismissed
  Civil liability — Deceit and negligent misrepresentation — HELOC interest change and CSBFL communications — Is the Bank liable for deceit or negligent misrepresentation? — Accord and satisfaction forecloses HELOC appraisal complaints — No dishonesty or careless disregard proven, no detrimental reliance under Cognos — Bank employees acted transparently — Claims dismissed
  Contracts — Remedies — Punitive and exemplary damages — Are punitive or exemplary damages warranted for loan administration and enforcement? — No malicious, oppressive or high‑handed conduct under Whitten — W. Got factors inapplicable to the Bank’s dealings — Efforts to assist after the fire recognized — Punitive and exemplary damages denied

Cour divisionnaire - Décisions récentes

• 2026-08-13 OPSEU v. The Crown, 2026 ONSC 3926 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Administrative law — Judicial review — Standard of review — Reasonableness under Vavilov — Was the arbitrator’s application of issue estoppel reasonable — Penner test engaged for overlapping MOL inspector orders and grievance — Deference to labour arbitrator’s balancing of finality and fairness — Parallel proceedings analysed in context — No basis to intervene — Application dismissed
  Labour and employment — Grievance arbitration — Collective agreement interpretation — Do Articles 2 and 9 impose obligations beyond the OHSA — Same question precondition satisfied under Penner — Arbitrator found CBA merely incorporates OHSA duties — Union identified no distinct contractual obligation or remedy — Grievance overlap with inspector’s orders established — Application dismissed
  Workplace health and safety — Occupational Health and Safety Act — Mandatory reporting — Effect of s. 51 OHSA on parallel proceedings — Did mandatory reporting preclude a grievance process — Inspector’s orders under s. 57 examined and final — Appeal to OLRB under s. 61 not pursued — Duplicative litigation avoided where issues coincide — Application dismissed
  Administrative law — Issue estoppel — Residual discretion — Danyluk factors and potential injustice — Did the arbitrator properly refuse to forgo estoppel — Prior process fair and comprehensive — Memorandum addressing ongoing OHSA compliance considered — No real injustice shown by Union — Judicial economy and consistency prioritised — Application dismissed
• 2026-08-12 Donegani v. Facebook, Inc., 2026 ONSC 4657 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Class actions — Class definition — Whether the proposed class definition was workable and supported by some basis in fact — Litigation plan and Master Class List considered under CPA s. 5(1) — Overinclusive and underinclusive membership concerns noted — Assumption of acceptable definition without deciding — Appeal dismissed
  Contracts — Class actions common issues — Breach of contract — Whether breach of contract could be certified as a common issue under the CPA — Rumley guidance on overly general questions applied — PIPEDA and standard form contract terms addressed as common — Individual inquiries required to determine breach for each class member — Appeal dismissed
  Contracts — Remedies — Disgorgement for breach of contract — Whether disgorgement could be determined as a common issue — Atlantic Lottery principles on exceptional disgorgement applied — Adequacy of compensatory damages not determinable in common given pleaded losses — Common issue on disgorgement refused — Appeal dismissed
  Procedure — Class actions — Preferable procedure — Whether a class proceeding was the preferable procedure under the CPA — No evidence of compensatory loss identified in record — Behaviour modification through regulatory proceedings considered — Manageability and judicial economy weighed with deference on appeal — Appeal dismissed
• 2026-08-11 Maghnam v. Maghnam, 2026 ONSC 4651 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Procedure — Stays pending appeal — RJR‑MacDonald test — Should a stay pending appeal be granted — Low merits threshold met but appeal weak — Presumptively correct order considered, serious issue not frivolous — Factors assessed together per Ducharme v. Hudson — No basis to suspend order pending appellate review — Motion for stay dismissed
  Family — Matrimonial home — Sale and possession — Should the sale order be amended to allow occupancy — Sole ownership and possessory and consent protections under Family Law Act ss. 19, 21, 23 — Listing, cooperation and case management directed — Appellant to reside during listing subject to maintaining sale‑ready condition and carrying costs — Sale process amended
  Procedure — Stays pending appeal — Irreparable harm — Did refusal of a stay cause irreparable harm — Constructive trust and unjust enrichment attach to preserved sale proceeds in trust — Medical evidence insufficient to show inability to move — Mahr‑related entitlement unpled and weak on present record — Harm largely compensable — Irreparable harm not established — Stay refused
  Procedure — Stays pending appeal — Balance of convenience — Does the balance of convenience favour a stay — Comparative prejudice weighed, Respondent’s ongoing financial hardship and children’s needs accepted — Status quo not equitable — Preservation of proceeds mitigates prejudice to Appellant — Sale to proceed while claims continue to trial — Balance of convenience favours Respondent — Stay denied
• 2026-08-07 Fulton v. Guan et al, 2026 ONSC 2757 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Rights and freedoms — Charter s. 15(1) — Disproportionate impact — Whether tribunal erred in finding no evidence that s. 21(1) of the Human Rights Code disproportionately impacts persons with disabilities — Data poverty and qualitative context overlooked — Built‑in headwinds and reasonable inferences required per Fraser and Kanyinda — First step met, tribunal decision set aside — Application allowed, matter remitted
  Administrative law — Judicial review — Standard of review — What standard applies to a tribunal’s Charter equality analysis — Correctness for constitutional questions and mixed fact and law (Vavilov, Société des casinos) — No deference where findings determine whether facts satisfy legal tests — Correctness standard applied
  Administrative law — Judicial review — Remedies — Appropriate remedy after error on s. 15(1) step one — Whether court should conduct remaining Charter analysis or remit — Court of review declines to decide second step and s. 1 without tribunal’s analysis of home statute — Matter remitted to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario — Remittal ordered
• 2026-08-06 Aubin v. Law Society of Ontario, 2026 ONSC 4431 (CanLII)
  Mots-clés: Judicial review — Practice and procedure — Costs