4 total
Default judgment of $116,382.46 granted against construction defendants for unpaid invoices.
The plaintiff brought a motion for default judgment against the MCI and Zebu Defendants for breach of contract regarding unpaid construction invoices.
The defendants had been noted in default and were deemed to admit the allegations in the statement of claim under s. 54(4) of the Construction Act.
The court found the evidence corroborated the claim and granted default judgment in the amount of $116,382.46.
Following precedent, the court determined it must issue a report rather than a judgment, as the motion took place within a reference.
Substantial indemnity costs of $7,000 were awarded to the plaintiff.
A contractor's late reconstitution of depleted statutory trust funds raises a genuine issue for trial regarding set-off rights, precluding summary judgment.
The plaintiff, San Remo Lighting, moved for summary judgment against the defendants, Am-Tech Electrical Inc. and others, alleging breach of trust obligations under the Construction Lien Act (CLA) for unpaid invoices.
Am-Tech admitted to not segregating trust monies as required by the CLA but later placed the claimed amount in its counsel's trust account.
The court, adopting reasoning from a Manitoba case, found that while a breach of trust had occurred, the subsequent reconstitution of the fund raised a genuine issue requiring a trial to fully evaluate the ramifications of the breach and the defendants' right to set-off.
The motion for summary judgment was dismissed, and the funds were ordered to be paid into court.
The court awarded reduced partial indemnity costs to the successful defendant, finding the nearly 600 hours docketed by counsel excessive.
The defendant Charlotte Marino, having successfully obtained summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim, sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis.
The plaintiff opposed, arguing for no costs.
The court, applying Rule 57.01, found Charlotte Marino entitled to costs but deemed the time docketed by her counsel excessive.
The court awarded Charlotte Marino $30,000 plus HST for fees and $13,531.78 for disbursements, to be paid by the plaintiff.
The court declined to award costs against a non-party.
Summary judgment granted dismissing trust claim over property funds as documentary evidence contradicted sham mortgage allegations.
The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's claim.
The plaintiff alleged that she and her late husband gave the proceeds from the sale of two properties to the defendants in trust, and that these funds were used to purchase a condominium to be held in trust for the plaintiff.
The defendant argued the funds were legitimate payouts for discharged mortgages.
The court found no genuine issue requiring a trial, concluding the documentary evidence supported the defendant's position that the funds were mortgage payouts, not trust funds.
The court rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the mortgages were shams designed to avoid creditors.
The motion for summary judgment was granted and the action dismissed.
