Asif Lasani

The moving party, McMaster University, brought a motion for leave to proceed with an application for judicial review of an adjudicator's determination, and requested a stay pending the review.

The Divisional Court granted leave to proceed with the judicial review but denied the request for a stay.

Costs of the leave motion were fixed at $8,800 to follow in the cause.

The owners of one commercial-residential property sought declaratory and monetary relief arising from a long-running parking and access dispute with the owner and tenant-operators of the adjoining property.

The court found continuous, uninterrupted, open and peaceful historical use of a narrow strip of the adjoining lands and the rear parking area sufficient to establish a prescriptive easement before land titles conversion.

The court also held that repeated obstruction of the east-west right-of-way and deliberate parking conduct by certain defendants constituted nuisance, but rejected claims for trespass damages and intentional interference with economic relations.

Counterclaims by the adjoining tenant and related parties were dismissed.

The court granted declaratory relief and awarded a total of $30,000 against three defendants.

The plaintiff brought a motion to set aside a Registrar's Order dismissing its action for delay under Rule 48.14.

The action had been dormant for over four years.

The court applied the Reid factors and found that the plaintiff failed to provide an adequate explanation for the delay, failed to show inadvertence, and failed to demonstrate that the defendants would not suffer actual prejudice.

The motion to set aside the dismissal was dismissed.

The court also noted that, had the dismissal been set aside, it would have granted the defendant's cross-motion for security for costs due to the plaintiff's insufficient assets.

The plaintiff moved for leave to amend a statement of claim in a shareholder oppression action under the Business Corporations Act and to add additional defendants.

The proposed amendments included clarification of existing claims, allegations of post‑litigation asset transfers, and claims involving fraudulent preferences, conspiracy, and diversion of corporate opportunities.

The court held that most amendments were legally tenable and arose from facts discovered after the action had been set down for trial, and therefore should be permitted.

However, amendments alleging misconduct by the defendants in the conduct of the litigation were found irrelevant to the pleaded causes of action and contrary to proper pleading rules.

Leave to amend was granted except for those specific allegations.

The applicant sought to relocate its campus bar, the Phoenix Bar & Grill, to a new central location at McMaster University.

Neighborhood residents objected to the liquor licence application, citing ongoing issues with intoxicated students, noise, and vandalism in the area.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the residents' concerns about general student drunkenness were valid, there was no evidence linking these issues specifically to the applicant's operations, which had a 43-year history without infractions.

The Tribunal approved the licence application but attached conditions regarding patio music, surveillance, and community contact to address the residents' concerns.