
General & Other judgments from Canadian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
A First Nations member challenged the upcoming election, arguing that the lack of online voting was unfair. However, the Federal Court dismissed the challenge, stating that the election was in compliance with the existing law.
A member of a person Cree First Nation challenged the decision to hold an election without providing online voting options, claiming this would prevent him from participating effectively in the election due to his distance from polling stations. The Federal Court dismissed his application because he did not provide evidence that the decision violated any legal rules.
In a case involving fishing quotas in Labrador, the Federal Court ruled that it does not have the authority to review decisions made by a person. The claimants' request for judicial review was denied because only the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador can hear such cases.
A federal court judge overturned an a person's conviction for possession of contraband because the decision-maker did not provide enough reasoning based on the evidence. The case highlights the importance of clear explanations in disciplinary decisions involving inmates.
The Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed a claimant's request for damages due to a late delivery of a bed. The court ruled that since the claimant accepted a later delivery date and did not return the bed, the seller was not liable for the delay.
The Supreme Court of Canada upheld a sexual assault conviction, emphasizing that a conviction must be based on a thorough examination of all evidence, not just a preference for the complainant's testimony.
A member of the a person tried to restart an appeal they had earlier ended but was unsuccessful. The Federal Court ruled that there were no special reasons allowing for a late appeal or extending the deadline.
The claimant tried to restart an appeal that they had previously withdrawn. However, the court decided against allowing the appeal to proceed because the claimant did not show exceptional circumstances that would allow the appeal to be revived outside the time limit.
The Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims because they were brought outside the two-year limitation period set by the Limitation Act. The claimant tried to recover unpaid fees and liquidated damages from the respondent, but the claims were found to be untimely.