Endorsements in the Court of Appeal

Endorsements have limited precedential value.  As explained in Timminco (2001), O.J. No. 1443 (Ont.C.A), at para. 36, they are mainly directed to the immediate parties, and should not be construed to support broad overarching principles that have not been specifically addressed in them:

 

[36]          Reasons of this court given by “endorsement” are mainly directed to the immediate parties.  Endorsements, like all judgments of this court, have precedential value but they should not be construed to support broad overarching principles which are not specifically addressed in them.  Thus, this court’s judgment in Grant Paving should be taken as authority only for the proposition that the appeal judge erred in not deferring to the trial judge’s finding of fact that there was no evidence that Grant Paving’s employee was exposed to a hazard.  Grant Paving has no further precedential value.