C. Abela

The moving parties sought pre-discovery disclosure of the responding parties' personal and corporate tax returns, notices of assessment, and bank statements from 2002 to 2019.

The underlying litigation involves a real estate development dispute where the moving parties allege the responding parties improperly used mortgage proceeds for personal expenses.

The court found the requested documents were relevant to tracing funds and testing the responding parties' assertions about their contributions to the property.

The court ordered the production of the tax returns and bank statements, but limited the temporal scope to the period between 2002 and 2016, when the property was sold.

The court fixed the costs of a motion where the defendant successfully opposed the registration of a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) on its property.

The defendant sought partial indemnity costs of $51,051.67, arguing it made a Rule 49 offer and the motion was complex.

The court found the Rule 49 offer invalid because it required unanimous acceptance by all moving parties and third-party consent.

The court also found the costs claimed completely unreasonable and excessive for a CPL motion, noting that counsel spent 222 hours on the matter.

The court fixed costs at $6,000, payable 75% by one group of plaintiffs and 25% by another.

The plaintiffs, investors in a real estate development, sought to register a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) against three lots and to register a preservation order regarding a vendor take-back mortgage on title.

The property had been sold to a third-party developer, Brampton G&A. The court dismissed the motion, finding that the parties had previously agreed not to register orders on title, the property was an investment property rather than unique, and the existing preservation order requiring mortgage payments to be paid into court provided sufficient protection without encumbering the third party's title.