Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This template is used to cite cases decided by the courts of Canada available in the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) database. You should look up the case you wish to cite on CanLII, then refer to the URL of the web page on which the case appears to fill in the information required by the template.
The CANLII database is one of the most comprehensive collections of Canadian federal, provincial and territorial legislation. [5] It is used by lawyers, legal professionals and the general public, with usage averaging over 30,000 visits per day. [ 6 ]
This template is used to cite cases decided by the courts of Canada available in the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) database. You should look up the case you wish to cite on CanLII, then refer to the URL of the web page on which the case appears to fill in the information required by the template.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Help; Learn to edit; Community portal; Recent changes; Upload file
Baker v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 SCR 817 is a leading Canadian administrative law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court provided guidance on the standard of judicial review of administrative decisions. The issue was what standard of procedural fairness should be applied when considering the ...
The SCC reasoned in their July 11, 2014 decision on Grassy Narrows v. Ontario, that Treaty 3 represented a "historical border dispute between Canada and Ontario over Ontario's northern and western boundaries". Based on article 1 of an 1891 agreement, the SCC found that the "disputed territory belonged to Ontario". [1]
Ford v Quebec (AG), [1988] 2 SCR 712 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision in which the Court struck down part of the Charter of the French Language, commonly known as "Bill 101". [2]
In its decision Central and Eastern Trust Co v Irving Oil Ltd, [2] the mortgage was invalidated. Having lost the case, Central Trust brought an action against the lawyers for negligence and breach of contract. In their defence, Rafuse and Cordon claimed: Their liability, if any, was in contract only and not in tort.