3 total
The court approved the majority of the receiver's fees but reduced the estimated closing fees due to an initially deficient motion record.
The court approved the sale of real property by the Receiver but reserved decision on the Receiver's and its counsel's fees.
The Debtor sought a 50% reduction in fees.
The court applied factors from Re Bakemates International Inc. to assess fairness and reasonableness.
While the Receiver's and counsel's fees to January 2020 were deemed reasonable, the estimated additional fees to close the file were reduced from $16,950 to $10,000 due to the Receiver's initial motion record lacking sufficient evidence for the property sale approval.
Summary judgment set aside after fresh evidence admitted showing the partial transcript relied upon was misleading.
The appellant appealed a summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent regarding a debt.
The motion judge had relied on a partial transcript from a related proceeding where the appellant seemingly admitted the debt.
On appeal, the appellant sought to introduce fresh evidence, including the full transcript which showed the admission was qualified by a claim that the parties had settled for half the amount.
The Court of Appeal admitted the fresh evidence, finding exceptional circumstances due to a communication breakdown between counsel and the inadvertently misleading nature of the partial transcript.
The appeal was allowed and the summary judgment set aside, but the respondent was awarded costs for both the motion and the appeal due to the appellant's failure to adduce the evidence originally.
Court of Appeal restores Commission's decision to demote rather than dismiss officer for discreditable conduct.
Constable Favretto was dismissed by a Hearing Officer for discreditable conduct after pointing his firearm at a fellow officer while in a dissociative state caused by workplace harassment.
The Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services varied the penalty to a demotion, finding the Hearing Officer failed to properly weigh provocation and rehabilitation.
The Divisional Court reinstated the dismissal.
The Court of Appeal allowed the officer's appeal, holding that the Divisional Court failed to properly apply the reasonableness standard of review to the Commission's decision, which was supported by a tenable explanation.
