4 total
The Court of Appeal dismissed the employer's appeal of a wrongful dismissal damages award.
The appellants appealed a wrongful dismissal judgment awarded by the trial judge in favour of the respondent.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's decision, finding no error in the award of damages for wrongful dismissal.
The appeal was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent.
Appeal allowed and claim for declaration that GST assessment is void struck for lacking factual basis.
The respondent sued the Ministers of National Revenue and Indian Affairs and CRA officials, alleging they targeted him and his business regarding the tax exemption in s. 87 of the Indian Act.
The appellants moved to strike the Amended Statement of Claim.
The motion judge dismissed the motion in part.
The appellants appealed, focusing on the Superior Court's jurisdiction to declare a GST assessment null and void.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and struck the claim for declaratory relief, finding the pleadings did not provide a basis in fact or law for such a declaration, without deciding the broader jurisdictional issue.
Application for mandamus dismissed; sawmill restructuring and wood redirection did not require Plan amendments.
The applicants sought judicial review and an order of mandamus to compel the Minister of Natural Resources to require public consultation and amendments to Forest Management Plans before two forestry companies could restructure their operations, close certain sawmills, and redirect wood supply.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Plans regulate forest operations and sustainability, not the processing of harvested wood at specific mills.
As the restructuring did not change the forest operations or impact sustainability, no Plan amendments or public consultations were required under the Crown Forest Sustainability Act.
Appeal dismissed as the trial judge's factual findings were supported by the record.
The appellants appealed a trial judgment, arguing that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that although the evidence on certain key issues was less clear than it could have been, the trial judge's findings were supported by the record and there was no misappreciation of the evidence.
