David Stratas

The appellants appealed a decision of the Federal Court of Appeal which had found that section 231.4 of the Income Tax Act infringed sections 7 and 8 of the Charter.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, adopting the dissenting reasons of Strayer J.A. in the court below.

The Court held that section 231.4 does not restrict the rights guaranteed by section 7 or section 8 of the Charter, and restored the trial judgment dismissing the constitutional challenge.

The appellant municipality sought restitution from the federal and provincial governments for monies paid to support juvenile delinquents placed in group homes under an ultra vires provision of the Juvenile Delinquents Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeals, holding that the municipality failed to establish that its payments conferred an 'incontrovertible benefit' on either level of government.

Neither government was under a legal obligation to pay for the juveniles' care, and the payments did not discharge a liability or save them an inevitable expense.

The appellants suffered severe injuries in a motor vehicle accident caused by an underinsured driver.

They sued their government-owned insurer for the shortfall, alleging the insurer failed to inform them about the availability of underinsured motorist coverage (UMC).

The Supreme Court of Canada held that a public insurer owes a duty of care to inform its customers of all available optional coverages, their purpose, and their cost.

The Court found the insurer breached this duty by providing inadequate and confusing information, and restored the trial judge's award of damages for the shortfall and costs on a solicitor and client basis.