4 total
Appeal of CVOR cancellation dismissed; permanent cancellation justified by history of poor safety compliance and fatal collisions.
The appellants, affiliated concrete suppliers, appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision upholding the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' cancellation of their Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR).
The cancellation followed a history of poor safety compliance and four fatal collisions involving the appellants' drivers.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the Tribunal's assessment of management's responsibility, the preventability of the collisions, or the appellants' safety record.
The Court also held that the permanent cancellation of the CVOR was not a disproportionate sanction given the ongoing safety problems and the need to protect the public.
Plaintiff awarded $33,000 in partial indemnity costs after successfully defending multiple summary judgment motions.
Following the dismissal of the defendants' motions for summary judgment regarding a prefabricated building dispute, the parties could not agree on costs.
The plaintiff sought $50,000 in elevated costs or $40,000 on a partial indemnity basis.
The court found no basis for elevated costs but awarded the plaintiff partial indemnity costs.
Noting some excessiveness in the plaintiff's use of two lawyers, the court fixed the costs at $33,000, inclusive of disbursements, to be paid equally by the defendants, and ordered a case conference to manage outstanding issues.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal from an order of Kurz J. dated December 10, 2020.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs of $3,150 to the respondent.
The court granted the defendants' motion for security for costs against the corporate plaintiff.
The defendants moved for security for costs against the corporate plaintiff under Rule 56.01(1), alleging insufficient assets in Ontario.
The plaintiff, while not claiming impecuniosity, argued that its financial state was caused by the defendants' alleged wrongful conduct and that its claim had a good chance of success.
The court found the merits of the case to be neutral for the purpose of the motion and determined that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate insufficient assets to post security.
The motion was granted, and the plaintiff was ordered to post security for incurred costs and future discovery costs.
Costs of the motion were awarded to the defendants.
