W. Danial Newton

The applicant, a mortgagee who sold a newly constructed home under power of sale, sought judicial review of Tarion's decision that it was a 'vendor' responsible for statutory warranties under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, upholding Tarion's finding that a mortgagee selling under power of sale is a vendor, relying on established precedent.

The court also rejected arguments that the home was sold 'as-is', noting the Act prohibits contracting out of statutory warranties, and declined to consider new arguments not raised before Tarion.

The accused sought an adjournment of his trial scheduled for September 8-10, 2025, on a charge of sexual assault under s. 271 of the Criminal Code.

The accused's counsel sought to explore prior relationship evidence that might trigger a s. 276 application and to conduct a thorough review of the accused's cellphone, texts, and social media accounts.

The Crown opposed the adjournment, noting that the accused's counsel had ample opportunity to prepare and that the cellphone contained nothing relevant to s. 276.

The court granted the adjournment, finding that while counsel's conduct had resulted in unnecessary delay and wasted judicial resources, the accused's right to a fair trial and the potential for an appeal based on ineffective assistance of counsel justified the adjournment.

The accused waived s. 11(b) Charter rights and all delay to the new trial date was attributed to the defence.

The appellant contractor appealed a trial judgment awarding the respondent subcontractor $852,416.50 for dewatering services and extra work on a municipal roadworks project.

The appellant argued the trial judge erred by admitting hearsay documents as business records and by inferring that the appellant had authorized the extra work by submitting the claims to the project owner.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge properly applied the business records exception under the Evidence Act and made factual findings supported by the voluminous record.

Hydro One Networks Inc. applied for orders to adjust the dates of possession in Notices of Possession under the Expropriations Act, to allow the application to proceed in the absence of a representative of the estate of James Thomas Witzell, and to dispense with service on the estate of Witzell and Susan Carol Boyes.

The application concerned the Waasigan Transmission Line Project, a 360 km electricity transmission line project in Northwestern Ontario.

Hydro One sought to abbreviate the notice period by 32 days to allow construction to begin on schedule.

The court granted the relief sought, finding that adjustment was in the public interest and that no prejudice to landowners was demonstrated.

The accused was charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Antoine Bouchard on January 23, 2022, in Thunder Bay.

The accused admitted to shooting the victim but claimed self-defence, asserting that the victim and two others were attempting to rob him while armed.

The Crown presented forensic evidence, including post-mortem examination findings and ballistics analysis.

Key witnesses included the alleged robbers and the accused.

The court found that the accused reasonably believed force was imminent, acted for the purpose of self-defence, and that his response was proportional to the threat faced.

The accused was acquitted of second-degree murder.

The appellant sought to appeal an order dismissing his motion to vary a final family law order.

The court issued a notice under Rule 2.1.01 that the appeal may be dismissed as frivolous.

The appellant argued that an annulment of his marriage extinguished his obligations under the prior order.

The court found the appeal devoid of merit, noting the prior order remained valid despite the subsequent annulment, and dismissed the appeal.

The court considered sentencing for G.M. following guilty pleas to two counts of sexual assault against his stepchildren.

The court rejected a joint submission for a four-year sentence, finding it inadequate given the gravity, duration, and breach of trust involved in the offences.

The decision reviews relevant case law and sentencing principles for sexual offences against children, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence.

The court provided G.M. the opportunity to apply to withdraw his guilty plea.

The appellant tenant appealed and sought judicial review of a Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) decision terminating her tenancy for the landlords' family use.

She argued that her paralegal provided ineffective assistance by conceding the landlords' good faith without her instructions.

The Divisional Court majority dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant failed to raise the ineffective assistance issue before the LTB in a timely manner.

The majority further held that in civil proceedings, the remedy for ineffective assistance of counsel is a claim against the representative, not the reversal of a valid administrative decision, and declined to extend the criminal law doctrine to this context.

A dissenting judge would have allowed the appeal and ordered a new hearing.

This decision concerns the interpretation of an insurance policy following a flood at the City of Thunder Bay’s wastewater pollution control plant.

The central issue was whether increased repair costs required by building code upgrades were subject to a $10 million sub-limit.

The court found that the policy was unambiguous and that the sub-limit applied to all code compliance costs, rejecting the City’s argument that broader coverage was available.

The court also addressed costs, awarding the insurers $25,000.

The court sentenced Marc Quirion for trafficking in methamphetamine after he pled guilty.

The sentencing considered the large quantity of drugs, Quirion’s significant criminal record, and his background, including exposure to drug culture from a young age.

The Crown sought an eight-year sentence, while the defence argued for three years less credit for time served.

The court imposed a six-year sentence, with credit for pre-sentence custody, and ordered a lifetime weapons prohibition, DNA order, and forfeiture of drugs and cash.

The appellant client appealed a Superior Court decision that dismissed her motion to oppose confirmation of an Assessment Officer's certificate regarding her former solicitors' accounts.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the motion judge did not err in her deferential review of the Assessment Officer's comprehensive reasons, nor did she err in concluding there was no denial of procedural fairness.

The Court also clarified that the objections process under Rule 58 is not mandatory for solicitor-client assessments under the Solicitors Act, finding prior jurisprudence to the contrary was decided per incuriam.

The decision addresses whether an appraisal conducted under section 128 of the Insurance Act is binding on an insurance broker who was not a party to the appraisal process.

The plaintiffs sought a determination under Rule 21.01(1)(a) that the appraisal’s finding of value should bind all parties, including the broker, in subsequent court proceedings.

The court held that Rule 21.01 was not the appropriate procedure for this determination, as the issue was not fully settled in law, was not raised in the pleadings, and involved mixed questions of fact and law.

The motion was dismissed.

The court granted the defendants' motion to discharge a construction lien registered by the plaintiff, Skyway Canada Limited, after the plaintiff failed to attend and participate in cross-examination on the claim for lien as required by section 40 of the Construction Act.

The plaintiff's request for an adjournment was denied, and the court found that the plaintiff's conduct in failing to communicate and participate justified the discharge of the lien.

Costs were awarded to the defendants.

The accused, Khalid Mohamed, was charged with second degree murder in the stabbing death of Steven Burns.

The facts were largely undisputed: Mohamed stabbed Burns, causing his death.

The central issue was whether Mohamed acted in self-defence or whether provocation would reduce the charge to manslaughter.

The court found that Mohamed had been robbed and assaulted by Burns and others, and that Mohamed stabbed Burns during a struggle for control of a knife.

The court concluded that the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mohamed’s actions were unreasonable in the circumstances, and acquitted him of second degree murder.

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) dismissing his appeal regarding a freedom of information request.

The applicant had requested records from the school board relating to an independent investigator retained by the Integrity Commissioner to investigate a trustee.

The IPC found that the requested records were not in the custody or control of the school board and that the board had conducted a reasonable search.

The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard of review and upheld the IPC's decision, finding no error in the IPC's application of the custody or control test and no denial of procedural fairness in the IPC's refusal to merge the applicant's appeals.

The court considered whether damage to Mr. Hood’s seasonal cabin was caused by an insured peril (windstorm) or by settling, which was excluded under the insurance policy.

After reviewing expert evidence and witness affidavits, the court found that a windstorm was the direct cause of the loss and that the exclusion for settling did not apply.

The court declared the loss covered under the policy.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of her action for damages arising from a trip and fall on a municipal sidewalk.

The trial judge had found the municipality was not liable under s. 44(3)(a) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as it did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know about the state of repair.

On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge failed to assess the adequacy of the inspections, failed to weigh business record evidence, and reversed the onus of proof.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no errors in the trial judge's assessment of the inspection adequacy, weighing of evidence, or application of the burden of proof.

The court granted a motion to dispense with service of the statement of claim and motion on the deceased’s estate, finding that the plaintiff had made extensive but unsuccessful efforts to locate a representative for the estate.

The court relied on the Rules of Civil Procedure and relevant case law to permit the proceeding to continue in the absence of a representative, and ordered that any surplus proceeds be paid into court on notice to the beneficiaries.

Costs were fixed at $8,943.47.

The plaintiff, Lac Seul First Nation, sought a Norwich order compelling the Bank of Nova Scotia to provide information identifying individuals and corporations alleged to have defrauded the plaintiff.

The motion was brought on notice to the Bank, which took no position, and without notice to the other defendants.

The court found that the plaintiff had a bona fide claim and that the Bank was the only practicable source of the information.

The order was granted as the interests of justice and necessity were established.

The respondent, Mark Jeffrey Buckley, pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking after police discovered drugs in an apartment during a home takeover.

As a permanent resident of Canada originally from Jamaica, Buckley faced deportation as a collateral immigration consequence of his conviction.

The Crown sought a two-year prison sentence, while the defence requested a conditional sentence to preserve Buckley's immigration appeal rights and support his rehabilitation.

The court ultimately sentenced Buckley to a conditional sentence of two years less a day, followed by two years of probation, finding that the threat of deportation and strict conditions would sufficiently deter him.