Dylan Skylar Fisher

The applicants, who purchased a residential property, sought declaratory relief against the City of Cambridge after the City denied municipal services, asserting the property's transfer violated the Planning Act due to a 1950 by-law.

This by-law deemed the original plan of subdivision not to be a registered plan for subdivision control purposes and was registered in the Registry office but not noted on the Land Titles parcel register after conversion.

The court found that the applicants were entitled to rely on the Land Titles register's "mirror" and "curtain" principles, as the 1950 by-law directly affected title and thus constituted an encumbrance requiring registration on the Land Titles register to be effective against bona fide purchasers without actual notice.

Furthermore, the by-law, as a "claim" under the Registry Act, had expired due to the City's failure to register a notice of claim within the statutory period.

The City's "floodgates" argument was rejected.

The application for declaratory relief was granted, affirming the validity of the applicants' title and transfer.

The appellant insurer appealed a lower court decision that found it had a continuing duty to defend the respondent insured in an underlying action.

The insured had purchased property with title insurance and was subsequently sued by a previous owner claiming invalid sale and unjust enrichment.

Although the insured later lost title to the property, the application judge found the amended statement of claim included a claim for damages against the insured, triggering the insurer's duty to defend.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the insurer's appeal, affirming that the amended statement of claim could reasonably be read to include a claim for damages against the insured, thus upholding the duty to defend.