the Supreme Court ruled on the case of Ivan Henry wrongful imprisonment lawsuit. He may proceed with suing the Crown prosecution for not disclosing many important facts that would have cast doubt on his sexual assault convictions in 1983. The major question to be considered in this case was if this failure by the Crown prosecution was intentional and therefore malicious - or just negligent, incompetent or unintentional.
It is a point that has hamstrung many similar appeals in the past as the test for maliciousness is so high as to almost impossible to meet - given that one would practically require an email or video of the prosecution discussing, planning or knowingly executing ways to deny justice to the defendant. Of course such proof is virtually impossible to obtain without some very lucky breaks or terribly incompetent prosecutors (but one never knows how an opportunity will present itself).
This case is one on many that has been successfully brought forward over the years by the Canadian Association for the Wrongfully Convicted.