TheCourt.ca

One Accounting, One Cause of Action? Estoppel in Patrick Street Holdings

omarhm — Mon, 02 Nov 2026 17:00:00 +0000

Final judgments should end disputes, but parties need to know which disputes they were required to resolve. In Patrick Street Holdings Ltd v 11368 NL Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada barred a new argument for payment under a mortgage excluded from an earlier accounting. I agree with that result. But how can respondents know when a challenge to part of an accounting also puts their own claims at stake?

Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia: How Should the Law Confront Intimate Partner Violence?

samherb — Thu, 29 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

In Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, the Supreme Court of Canada reckoned with the largely-gendered harms of intimate partner violence. Justice Kasirer established a framework for developing new intentional torts, created a new tort of intimate partner violence to combat the distinct wrong of coercive control, and clarified the overlapping roles that tort and family law play for seeking justice and compensating victims. While the Court’s decision provided some needed clarity, it also raised as many questions as it answered, leaving unaddressed issues to be resolved in future decisions.

Police Misconduct and the Duty to Disclose: Edmonton (Police Service) v McKee

mgoldb — Wed, 28 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Does an accused have a right to the disclosure of an administratively expunged record of police misconduct? In Edmonton (Police Service) v McKee, the SCC clarified Canada's criminal disclosure framework, holding that police must transmit obviously relevant misconduct information to the Crown, which ultimately determines what must be disclosed to protect an accused's right to make full answer and defence.

Knocking on Singer's Door: The Implied Licence Doctrine in R v Singer, 2026 SCC 8

ggalpin — Tue, 27 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

In R v Singer, 2026 SCC 8 [Singer], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) considered the scope of implied licences and the admissibility of evidence that was illegally obtained during an impaired driving investigation.

‘Excusez Moi?’: Language Rights in Société de l’Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick v Canada (Prime Minister)

Arabella Hareem Abid — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Language rights in Canada have a broad history. There is perhaps no province that embodies this commitment quite like New Brunswick, given its status as the only official bilingual province in Canada. In Société de l’Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick v Canada (Prime Minister) 2026 SCC 22 [Nouveau-Brunswick], the Supreme Court (SCC) contends with applying Charter protected […]

Delete at Your Own Risk: Spoliation in SS&C Technologies v BNY Mellon

omarhm — Mon, 19 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

Destroying evidence should never leave a party better off. In SS&C Technologies Canada Corp v Bank of New York Mellon Corp, the Supreme Court of Canada considered how courts should address situations when a party intentionally deletes evidence relevant to the calculation of damages. For the first time in more than a century, the Court clarified the law of spoliation. I suggest that while the Court shows how far the resulting adverse inference can go in the most severe cases, it leaves trial judges unsure when to go that far.

Ceiling or No Ceiling? R v R.B.-C. and When Sentencing Delay Becomes Unreasonable

samherb — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

In R v R.B.-C., the Supreme Court of Canada was asked to apply a presumptive ceiling to determine when sentencing delay breaches s. 11(b) of the Charter. Justice Martin declined to do so, holding instead that the test is a ‘markedly longer’ standard. She also held that the correct remedy for unreasonable sentencing delay is a reduction in sentence. This unanimous decision from the Court reveals how it views judges as normative actors within the Canadian criminal justice system.

R v Nguyen: Can Property Be Forfeited After a Stay of Proceedings?

khamwill — Thu, 15 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

A stay of criminal proceedings ends an accused’s prosecution, but does it also prevent the Crown from seeking forfeiture of property allegedly connected to criminal activity? In R v Nguyen, 2026 SCC 10 [Nguyen], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC” or the “Court”) considered whether the Crown could pursue forfeiture after criminal proceedings were stayed […]

Can a Failed Candidate Sue an Election Official? In Resler v Anglin the SCC Says Yes

mgoldb — Wed, 14 Oct 2026 16:00:00 +0000

In Resler v Anglin, the Supreme Court of Canada confronted two fundamental interests seemingly at odds: the integrity of elections and the right to seek compensation for civil wrongs. The majority held that an unsuccessful election candidate's claim for damages was not barred by abuse of process or collateral attack doctrines, and that the election official was not protected by statutory immunity or parliamentary privilege. The justices also differed on the availability of loss of chance damages in the electoral context.

Patentability of Methods of Medical Treatment: MMT Doctrine Affirmed in Janssen v Pharmascience, 2026 SCC 26

ggalpin — Tue, 13 Oct 2026 18:48:14 +0000

In Janssen v Pharmascience 2026 SCC 26 [Janssen], the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) affirmed the methods of medical treatment (“MMT”) doctrine in patent law, confirming that MMTs are unpatentable subject matter in Canadian Law under s. 2 of the Patent Act, RSC, 1985, c P-4 [the Act]. Though this has been the state of the law for over 50 years, two judges disagreed on this point, arguing that since the repeal of s. 41(1) of the Act in 1993, there has been no statutory basis for a blanket prohibition on the patentability of MMTs.