Daniel Lawson

The appellant, a real estate lawyer, appealed the dismissal of his claims of civil fraud and equitable fraud against his former real estate clerk and her husband.

The appellant alleged they used his law office to facilitate fraudulent schemes.

The trial judge dismissed the claims, finding the appellant failed to prove false representations were made to him and that there was no unconscionable conduct for equitable fraud.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's decision, finding no palpable and overriding error in the factual findings or legal application, and dismissed the appeal.

The plaintiff vendor brought a motion for summary judgment seeking specific performance of an agreement of purchase and sale for a custom-built home after the defendant purchaser failed to close.

The purchaser argued the agreement was complex, he lacked English skills, and his agent had a conflict of interest, but provided no legal basis to void the contract.

The court found no genuine issue for trial, upheld the agreement, and ordered specific performance, noting the home's customized features and the difficulty of assessing damages due to unsold inventory.

The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual assault and sexual interference involving a child complainant.

The Crown cross-appealed the conditional sentence, arguing it was illegal due to a mandatory minimum.

The Superior Court of Justice found that the trial judge misapprehended significant inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence regarding the location and frequency of the alleged assaults.

As this misapprehension played an essential part in the trial judge's credibility assessment, the conviction appeal was allowed, the convictions were set aside, and a new trial was ordered.

The Crown's cross-appeal against sentence was dismissed in light of the successful conviction appeal.