Amiri Moses Dear

The applicant, Jie Zhang, sought to enforce judgments from Chinese courts against the respondent, Fan Zhou, a resident of Ontario.

The Beijing Xicheng District People's Court had issued a judgment in Zhang's favour for breach of contract, which was subsequently upheld on appeal.

Zhou later initiated a new proceeding in Guangzhou, attempting to undermine the Beijing judgment, but this action was dismissed as a "repeat complaint" and the dismissal was upheld on appeal.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice applied the principles for recognizing and enforcing foreign judgments, confirming that the Beijing judgment met the criteria of being rendered by a competent jurisdiction, being final, and being for a definite sum.

The respondent's defense of lack of natural justice was rejected, as the court found no evidence that the Chinese proceedings were contrary to Canadian notions of fundamental justice.

The application was granted, and the Chinese judgments were recognized and ordered to be enforced in Ontario.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario issued a costs endorsement following its main appeal decision.

The court awarded the respondents costs for two pre-hearing motions ($1,000 for the Motion to Expedite and $7,000 for the Motion to Introduce Fresh Evidence).

Due to divided success on the appeal itself, the parties were ordered to bear their own costs for the appeal.

The lower court's costs order was not disturbed as the basis for the appellants' partial success on one issue was not argued at the application level.

The appellants, owners of a servient tenement, appealed a decision dismissing their application to declare two registered rights of way (ROWs) abandoned by the dominant tenement owners.

The Court of Appeal affirmed that abandonment requires proof of a fixed intention never to assert the right, inferred from non-use and acquiescence to permanent obstructions.

The Court found a palpable and overriding error in the application judge's assessment of the 174 Strachan ROW, concluding it was completely obstructed by a permanent house extension and thus abandoned.

For the 176 Strachan ROW, which was only partially obstructed, the Court dismissed the appeal for total abandonment but allowed it for partial abandonment of the portion under the house extension, remitting this issue for further determination.

A custody and access trial concerning a two-year-old child.

The mother sought sole custody with limited access for the father (8 hours on Saturdays for at least 8 months).

The father sought joint custody with alternate weekend access from Friday evening to Monday morning, plus mid-week access.

The court found that joint custody was not appropriate due to the parties' inability to communicate effectively.

The court awarded sole custody to the mother but significantly expanded the father's access beyond what the mother proposed, finding that the mother had been unnecessarily restrictive.

The court phased in overnight access over a short period, ultimately ordering alternate weekend access from Friday after day care to Monday morning, with mid-week access to be determined at a further hearing.