A. Van Kralingen

The plaintiffs brought an action against the defendant, the sister of one of the plaintiffs, regarding the allocation of proceeds from the sale of a jointly owned property, damages for ouster, and conversion of personal property.

The defendant counterclaimed for unjust enrichment, alleging she was a 50% beneficial owner of the plaintiffs' restaurant businesses under a joint family venture.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the counterclaim, finding no joint family venture existed in this extended family context and that the defendant failed to prove she made a direct financial contribution.

The court granted the plaintiffs' action in part, awarding damages for the defendant's ouster of the plaintiffs from the joint property and for the conversion of various personal items, including a grand piano.

The plaintiff brought a motion in writing for default judgment against his former employer for wrongful dismissal.

The court first determined that the action was not statute-barred because the limitation period was suspended under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court noted the defendant in default and found the plaintiff was entitled to damages in lieu of reasonable notice.

Applying the Bardal factors, the court awarded a 20-month notice period, resulting in damages of $91,667.00, without deductions for mitigation income as the employer failed to meet its burden of proof.

The defendants brought a motion to set aside a default judgment obtained by the plaintiff for unauthorized shipping charges.

The court applied the five-factor test for setting aside a default judgment.

The court found that the defendants did not bring the motion promptly, deliberately evaded service and ignored the litigation, and failed to present an arguable defence on the merits.

The motion to set aside the default judgment was dismissed.