Who is Justice Douglas Rutherford?

Justice Douglas Rutherford is an Ontario judge at the Superior Court of Justice with 21 decisions on record from 2003 to 2016. Key areas include civil litigation - defendant, civil litigation - plaintiff, criminal and quasi-criminal law.

What court does Justice Douglas Rutherford sit in?

Justice Douglas Rutherford has sat at Superior Court of Justice and Ontario Divisional Court.

What areas of law does Justice Douglas Rutherford specialize in?

Justice Douglas Rutherford's most common areas include Civil Litigation - Defendant (10 cases), Civil Litigation - Plaintiff (10 cases), Criminal and Quasi-Criminal Law (8 cases). Justice Douglas Rutherford has handled 21 cases across 10 practice areas.

How many cases has Justice Douglas Rutherford decided?

Justice Douglas Rutherford has 21 reported decisions from 2003 to 2016 across 2 courts.

What lawyers frequently appear before Justice Douglas Rutherford?

Top counsel appearing before Justice Douglas Rutherford include Self-represented, Christopher Moore, Douglas G. Menzies.

minicounsel

Civil Litigation - Defendant

Civil Litigation - Plaintiff

Criminal and Quasi-Criminal Law

Wills, Estates, Trusts Law

Administrative Law

Health Law

Small Claims Court matters

Charity and Not-For-Profit Law

Employment and Labour Law

Indigenous Legal Issues

Douglas Rutherford

Since 2003

21 total

Christopher Edward Clermont

In Private Practice9 cases1991–2024

Douglas Rutherford

ODC21 cases2003–2016

ODCDivisional CourtNov 3, 2003

Appeal from Small Claims Court dismissed; homeowner liable for unpaid balance of HVAC installation contract.

The appellant contracted with the respondent for the installation of a high-efficiency gas furnace and air-conditioning unit.

Dissatisfied with the location of the ductwork and other elements, the appellant refused to pay the balance owing.

The respondent successfully sued in Small Claims Court for the unpaid balance.

The appellant appealed to the Divisional Court.

The court dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial error by the trial judge, noting that the appellant had left the specific location of the materials to the professionals and the contract made no specific provision for it.