Alexander Etkin

The defendant moved to set aside a default judgment and a Registrar's dismissal order for delay.

The plaintiff had obtained default judgment after serving the statement of claim by substitute service to addresses where the defendant did not reside.

The defendant discovered the judgment years later when selling a property and paying off a writ of execution.

The court found the default judgment was irregularly obtained because the defendant never received the claim.

Alternatively, the court held it was in the interests of justice to set aside the judgment, as the defendant had an arguable defence of forgery.

The default judgment, noting in default, and dismissal order were set aside, and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the writ discharge funds into court.

The applicant sought judicial review of a Small Claims Court interlocutory order that required it to pay the proceeds of a vehicle sale into court as a condition of an adjournment.

The Divisional Court declined to grant relief, finding that the applicant's conduct in seeking judicial review was an unnecessary step that delayed the resolution of the underlying motion on its merits.

The application for judicial review was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent.

The landlord brought a motion to lift the stay of a Landlord and Tenant Board eviction order pending the tenant's appeal.

The tenant had failed to comply with a previous court order requiring him to make payments toward substantial rental arrears and ongoing monthly rent.

The tenant did not attend the motion hearing and informed the court via email that he had relocated overseas and was abandoning the appeal.

The court granted the unopposed motion, lifted the stay, dismissed the appeal as abandoned, and awarded costs to the landlord.

The tenant appealed orders of the Landlord and Tenant Board, resulting in an automatic stay of eviction.

The court directed the tenant to pay ongoing rent and a portion of arrears as a condition of continuing the appeal.

The tenant failed to make any payments and failed to perfect the appeal.

The landlords brought a motion to quash the appeal.

The court found the tenant's failure to pay rent or move forward with the appeal constituted an abuse of process, quashed the appeal, and lifted the stay.

The plaintiffs (landlords) were entirely successful in a landlord and tenant dispute against the defendants, who had failed to pay rent for three years and gamed the system by fabricating a tenancy for an unidentified spouse.

The court awarded the plaintiffs costs of $45,842.95 on a substantial indemnity basis.

Furthermore, the court found that the defendants' lawyer had allowed his client to abuse the administration of justice and ordered the lawyer to personally pay the costs if the defendants failed to do so within thirty days.

The plaintiff landlords brought a motion for default judgment against the defendant tenant corporation and its principal for over $300,000 in rent arrears and possession of the residential premises.

The defendants brought a cross-motion to set aside their noting in default.

The court found the defendants had engaged in a bad faith campaign to game the system, occupying the premises rent-free for three years while illegally using it for business purposes.

The court dismissed the motion to set aside the noting in default, pierced the corporate veil to hold the principal jointly and severally liable, granted default judgment for the rent arrears, awarded $100,000 in punitive damages, and ordered immediate eviction.

The plaintiffs brought a motion for default judgment in a landlord and tenant dispute involving approximately $300,000 in rent arrears.

The defendants resisted and moved to set aside the noting of default.

On the day of the hearing, the parties presented a proposed consent order to terminate the tenancy and grant a writ of possession.

The court declined to issue the order because it mistakenly stated that one of the defendants had been noted in default, failed to properly identify that defendant, and did not address an outstanding counterclaim.

The motion was adjourned to allow the parties to either argue the motion on its merits or resolve the issues.