5 total
The court converted cross-applications for the winding up of jointly held real estate corporations into actions and consolidated them with a related oppression action.
This decision addresses cross-applications between two groups of real estate investors, led by David Civiero and Grant Alexander Hood, regarding the winding up or buy-sell/shotgun disposition of their jointly held corporations.
The court grants leave to add parties, converts the applications to actions, and orders transfer and consolidation with a related Toronto action, finding that the complexity and credibility issues require a full trial.
Motion to amend pleadings and compel discovery seven years after setting down for trial largely dismissed.
The plaintiff insured brought a motion for leave to amend its statement of claim, for a further and better affidavit of documents, and to compel answers to undertakings, over seven years after setting the action down for trial.
The defendant insurer brought a cross-motion to compel answers to undertakings.
The court denied the plaintiff leave to amend the statement of claim, finding the proposed amendments would radically change the nature of the claim and cause non-compensable prejudice to the defendant.
The court also dismissed the motions to compel answers to undertakings, finding both parties had waived or satisfied their rights.
The court ordered the defendant to produce two witness statements but found the remaining requested documents were protected by litigation privilege.
Summary judgment denied in insurance claim due to lack of evidence on extent of water damage.
The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment seeking indemnification under a commercial insurance policy for cellphone stock allegedly damaged by a toilet backup.
The parties had previously engaged in an appraisal process which left a category of 'disputed phones' unresolved due to sample testing.
The court dismissed the plaintiff's motion and the defendant's request for a 'boomerang' summary judgment, finding a genuine issue requiring a trial because there was no evidence regarding the existence or absence of damage to the disputed phones.
Vehicle owner held vicariously liable after failing to rebut presumption of implied consent for boyfriend's use.
The plaintiff's claims arising from a motor vehicle accident were settled, leaving a liability dispute between the defendant vehicle owner and the plaintiff's insurer.
The owner's boyfriend took her vehicle without express permission and was involved in a collision.
The court found the owner's evidence lacking in credibility, noting her failure to report the vehicle stolen and her delay in contacting police.
The court held that the owner failed to rebut the presumption under s. 192(2) of the Highway Traffic Act that the driver had her implied consent to possess the vehicle, rendering her vicariously liable.
Motion to set aside default judgment dismissed as defendants had actual notice and no tenable defence.
The defendants brought a motion to set aside a default judgment entered against them regarding a failed real estate transaction.
They argued they were not properly served with the statement of claim and were noted in default one day early.
The court found that while personal service was not effected and the noting in default was premature by one day, the defendants had actual notice of the claim and failed to act promptly or present a tenable defence.
The court exercised its discretion to validate service and dismissed the motion to set aside the default judgment.
