This is covered in Section 6.1.3 of the COAL Guide.
CITATION ELEMENTS: Case name | (year if not included in main citation) | , main citation, | parallel citation | pinpoint [if needed] | (database used) [if required] | (jurisdiction and level of court) | [short form if required].
Any reporters are acceptable, but preference should be given to the official reporters, and case summaries and paywalled database citations should be avoided. For more information and examples, see Section 6.4.
EXAMPLES:
R v Lyon (1898), 29 OR 497, 2 CCC 242 (ON High CJ (Common Pleas Division, DC)).
Cleary v Boscowitz (1901), 8 BCR 225, 1 MMC 506 (BCSC).
Let's examine each part of the citation for two cases with other sources to understand how they are constructed:
The considerations are identical to a case with a neutral citation.
example 1: R v Lyon
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz
The year of decision must always directly follow the case name. If the correct year of the case is not already present in the main citation, it should be added in round brackets after the case name and before the comma. You can find the year of the decision in the case itself.
In example 1, the main citation provided is 29 OR 497. Since that citation does not include a year, we have to inset it in parentheses after the case name, followed by a comma.
example 1: R v Lyon (1898),
In example 2, the two citations provided are 8 BCR 225 (main citation) and 1 MMC 506 (parallel citation). Since the main citation does not indicate the year of the case, we need to add it in parentheses after the case name, followed by a comma.
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz (1901),
Some reporters include the year in their citations. If the citation includes the year of the decision, the year does not need to be added again after the case name.
example 3: Chudleigh v Ross, [1955] 4 DLR 437, 16 WWR 371 (BCSC).
In this example, the main citation includes the year of decision. Because of this, no year needs to be added to the case name in parentheses.
What to do when the year of decision and the year of publication in the reporter are different:
In most cases, the year of publication coincides with the year the decision was handed down. Sometimes, however, there is a time lag between when a case was decided and when it was reported. To be sure of the year of the decision, look at the beginning of the case itself.
If the year of the decision is different from the year in the main citation, provide the year of the decision in parentheses after the style of cause.
In this example, the case was decided in 1917 but not published in the Western Weekly Reports until 1918. This requires both years to be included in the citation.
example 4: Hamelin v Newton (1917), [1918] 1 WWR 107, 38 DLR 743 (MBKB).
If a case does not have a neutral citation or a CanLII citation, then you must use another source as the main citation. Any reporters are acceptable, but preference should be given to the official reporters, and case summaries and paywalled database citations should be avoided. To learn more about case law reporters, see Case Citations and "Reported" Decisions in our Legal Research Manual.
The purpose of reporter selection is to find the citation that will be available to the largest number of people reading the document. Select reporters based on the anticipated audience. For more information about different types of reporters and examples from the COAL Guide, see Section 6.4. For a list of reporter abbreviations, see the University of British Columbia Law Library’s Legal Journals and Law Reports Abbreviations or the Cardiff Index to Legal Abbreviations.
In example 1, R v Lyon is reported in the Ontario Reports (OR) and the Canadian Criminal Cases (CCC). If viewing the case in Lexis, there is also the database citation [1898] OJ No 129. If viewing the case in Westlaw, there is also the database citation 1898 CarswellOnt 110. These two citations should be avoided because they are paywalled database citations, leaving the OR and CCC citations. The OR citation has been chosen for its geographical reach, followed by the CCC citation as the parallel citation.
example 1: R v Lyon (1898), 29 OR 497, 2 CCC 242
In example 2, Cleary v Boscowitz is reported in the British Columbia Reports (BCR) and Martin's Mining Cases (MMC). We will again disregard the Lexis citation ([1901] BCJ no 49) and Westlaw citation (1901 CarswellBC 69) because they are paywalled database citations. Because of the relative obscurity of Martin's Mining Cases, the BCR citation has been chosen as the main citation, followed by the MMC citation as the parallel citation.
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz (1901), 8 BCR 225, 1 MMC 506
Include a pinpoint if you are citing to a particular passage in the judgment. The placement of the pinpoint depends on what version of the case you are citing to.
If you are pinpointing to a case as it appears in a database (i.e., the HTML version) other than CanLII, add the pinpoint after the parallel citation and indicate the database used, as paragraph or page numbers can vary between databases.
In example 1, the pinpoint is to the version of R v Lyon viewed in Lexis. This version provides paragraphs, not page numbers, so it is cited to a paragraph.
example 1: R v Lyon (1898), 29 OR 497, 2 CCC 242 at para 14 (Lexis)
In example 2, the pinpoint is to the version of Cleary v Boscowitz viewed in Westlaw. This version also provides paragraphs, not page numbers, so it is cited to a paragraph.
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz (1901), 8 BCR 225, 1 MMC 506 at para 8 (Westlaw)
Note: Include the database in parentheses if you will be pinpointing to the case in a subsequent citation, even if the initial citation does not include a pinpoint (see 6.1.3.1.2).
example 1: R v Lyon (1898), 29 OR 497, 2 CCC 242 (Lexis)
Also Note: If you are pinpointing to a case as it appears in a physical reporter (rather than as it appears in a database), use that reporter as the main citation and add the pinpoint after the main citation. See 6.1.3.2 under "Physical Reporters".
For example, if you had actually consulted Cleary v Boscowitz in volume 8 of the British Columbia Reports starting at page 225, and your pinpoint was found on page 226, your pinpoint would follow your main citation.
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz (1901), 8 BCR 225 at 226, 1 MMC 506
A case citation should always indicate both the jurisdiction and court level. Neutral citations take care of this requirement, but for any cases without a neutral citation, you will need to include this information in parentheses at the end of the citation.
Use the abbreviations from CanLII's Primary Law Databases page to determine the abbreviations for jurisdiction and court (under "Code").
example 1: R v Lyon (1898), 29 OR 497, 2 CCC 242 (ON High CJ (Common Pleas Division, DC))
In example 1, the Primary Law Databases list shows that "ON" is the abbreviation for Ontario, but it does not include an abbreviation for this historical court that no longer exists - Ontario High Court of Justice (Common Pleas Division, Divisional Court).
When a specific situation is not covered by the COAL Guide, it advises at Rule 1, "For anything not covered in this guide, create a citation that is consistent with the rules and formats contained in this guide. When creating citations, remember that the most important aspect of a citation is not its format, but its ability to acknowledge and direct the reader to the information in the cited source."
Keeping this in mind, one option would be to construct it by spelling out words for which no abbreviation exists in the Primary Law Databases list (e.g., "High") and using abbreviations from the Primary Law Databases for words or phrases that do exist (e.g., "DC" for Divisional Court).
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz (1901), 8 BCR 225, 1 MMC 506 (BCSC).
In example 2, the Primary Law Databases list shows that BCSC is the abbreviation for the Supreme Court of British Columbia, so this is added to the end of the citation in parentheses.
When citing a case (or similar) more than once in a document, add a shortened case name in square brackets at the end of the citation the first time the case is cited. In subsequent citations of this case, only the shortened case name (and pinpoint, if applicable) is needed.
To create a shortened case name, typically use the name of the first party, or, if the first party is the Crown, use the name of the party that is not the Crown. See 6.11 of the COAL Guide for more information.
example 1: R v Lyon (1898), 29 OR 497, 2 CCC 242 (ON High CJ (Common Pleas Division, DC)) [Lyon]
In example 1, since the first party is the crown, the name of the other party, Lyon, is used for the short form.
example 2: Cleary v Boscowitz (1901), 8 BCR 225, 1 MMC 506 (BCSC) [Cleary].
In example 2, Cleary, the name of the first party, is used.