C.T. Hackland

The respondent was successful on her motion for temporary spousal support and the sale of the matrimonial home.

She had previously made a settlement offer to accept a lower amount of support.

The applicant had unwisely withheld support to leverage increased access, which was delayed pending an OCL report.

The court awarded the respondent costs fixed at $5,000 for fees plus HST and $300 for disbursements.

The accused were charged with multiple offences including conspiracy to traffic cocaine, trafficking, and participating in a criminal organization following a lengthy police investigation involving wiretaps and surveillance.

The court found both accused guilty of conspiracy to traffic and trafficking in cocaine, relying on intercepted communications and surveillance evidence establishing their roles in an ongoing drug distribution network.

However, the court acquitted them of the criminal organization charges, finding insufficient evidence of structure or leadership to meet the statutory definition.

The court also dismissed the accused's application under s. 11(b) of the Charter, concluding that the 38-month delay was justified by the case's complexity and the transitional exception under the Jordan framework.

The defendants brought motions to strike the plaintiff's 80-page statement of claim, which alleged wrongful dismissal and various torts against his former employer, a legal aid clinic, its funder, and various individuals.

The court struck the claims against the employer's outside counsel, the funding agency, and two individual employees without leave to amend, finding no reasonable cause of action was disclosed.

The remainder of the statement of claim against the employer and other individuals was struck for failing to comply with the rules of pleading, with leave granted to deliver a fresh as amended statement of claim.

Following a seven-week personal injury jury trial, the court determined post-trial adjustments to the $2.3 million verdict.

The court ruled that recent Insurance Act amendments increasing statutory deductibles applied retrospectively, but changes to pre-judgment interest did not.

Applying the 'silos of deductibility' approach, the court deducted the plaintiff's $900,000 Statutory Accident Benefits (SABs) settlement from the tort award, but apportioned the deduction 50-50 between the defendant and a non-party driver who had previously settled, matching the jury's liability finding.

The plaintiff's final judgment of $500,827 slightly exceeded the defendant's Rule 49 offer, entitling the plaintiff to costs, which the court fixed at $100,000 plus disbursements.

The plaintiff in a motor vehicle accident case served a Notice of Discontinuance against two defendants.

Despite this, the defendants insisted on proceeding with a previously scheduled summary judgment motion to dismiss the action, seemingly to leverage higher costs.

The plaintiff brought a cross-motion to approve the Notice of Discontinuance nunc pro tunc.

The court granted the plaintiff's cross-motion, finding the defendants' summary judgment motion to be vexatious, unnecessary, and an abuse of process.

The summary judgment motion was permanently stayed, and the defendants were ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of $15,305.

The appellant appealed his conviction for refusing to comply with a demand to provide a breath sample.

He argued that the police had no lawful basis to ask for a sample, that he was not asked in a way he could understand, and that he had a reasonable excuse due to fear of the police.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's credibility assessments were reasonable, the officer had a reasonable suspicion to make the demand, and the appellant's claimed excuse lacked an air of reality.

Following the settlement of an action to recover a loan used to purchase property, the plaintiff sought partial indemnity costs.

The action settled on the eve of trial for $125,000 plus costs.

The court found the plaintiff's counsel's hourly rates and time spent were reasonable, noting the defendant's lack of cooperation and the need for various procedural steps.

The court fixed the plaintiff's partial indemnity costs at $30,000 for fees plus $8,646 for disbursements.

Following a jury trial for a motor vehicle accident, the court ruled on post-verdict issues including the statutory threshold and deductibles.

The court found the plaintiff met the threshold for permanent serious impairment due to a somatic symptom disorder.

However, the court held that the increased statutory deductibles enacted in August 2015 applied retrospectively, which reduced the jury's non-pecuniary and Family Law Act damage awards to zero.

After applying set-offs for statutory accident benefits, judgment was issued for the plaintiffs in the amount of $56,294.98.

The accused was convicted of sexual assault with a weapon and unlawful confinement against his spouse.

The offences involved luring the complainant, binding her, whipping her with a belt, and forcing sexual intercourse.

Despite the complainant's plea for a non-custodial sentence to preserve their business and co-parenting arrangement, the court emphasized denunciation and general deterrence for serious domestic violence.

The accused was sentenced to two years in penitentiary for sexual assault with a weapon and a concurrent 12-month term for unlawful confinement.

The moving party, a professional association, brought a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's action as an abuse of process or for summary judgment.

The plaintiff, a former member of the association, sued for defamation, conspiracy, and breach of privacy arising from the association's publication of a notice of hearing that included his own complaint against co-workers.

The court granted the motion and dismissed the action, finding it was an impermissible collateral attack on the association's unappealed discipline decision.

Furthermore, the court held that the defamation and privacy claims were statute-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002, and that the association was protected by statutory immunity and absolute privilege.

The offender, suffering from schizo-affective disorder and psychotic delusions, fatally stabbed a fellow resident in a rooming house.

Following an unsuccessful NCR defence, a jury found him guilty of manslaughter.

The court sentenced the offender to 8 years imprisonment, less 4 years credit for pre-trial custody, emphasizing the need for general deterrence and public protection through psychiatric treatment within the federal penitentiary system.

Certain beneficiaries of an estate brought a motion to remove the estate solicitor and his firm due to a conflict of interest in a contested passing of accounts.

The solicitor had previously acted for one of the estate trustees when she was the deceased's power of attorney for property, and had handled many of the transactions now in dispute.

The court found that the solicitor's extensive involvement in the deceased's affairs and the estate created a potential conflict situation.

The motion was granted and the solicitor's firm was removed as counsel for the estate.