Edward Sullivan

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his action for damages related to a failed real estate transaction involving a Hindu Temple.

The trial judge had dismissed the claims of fraud and unjust enrichment, partly because the appellant's corporations were not named as parties.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the fraud claims but found the trial judge erred in her treatment of the unjust enrichment claim and in limiting the piercing of the corporate veil to cases of fraud.

The Court allowed the appeal, awarded the appellant $7,500 for mortgage payments made on behalf of the respondents, and ordered a new trial for the unjust enrichment claim regarding the remaining advances.

This endorsement addresses the issue of costs following a judgment where the action was granted in part, the counterclaim dismissed, and the third-party claim dismissed.

The Plaintiff and Third Party sought costs on a partial indemnity basis up to February 2, 2023, and substantial indemnity thereafter, relying on an offer to settle.

The Defendants failed to submit costs arguments.

The court found the Plaintiff and Third Party were successful and entitled to costs.

Despite potential technical non-compliance with Rule 49.10, the offer to settle's terms were more favourable than the judgment, justifying substantial indemnity from the offer date under Rule 49.13.

The court reduced the quantum sought due to high junior lawyer rates and duplication, ultimately awarding an all-inclusive amount of $115,000.00.

This case involved a dispute between ex-spouses, Kathie Debren (Plaintiff) and Kevin Debren (Defendant), primarily concerning the ownership of a cottage property.

Both parties had a history of fraudulent financial conduct, including sham divorces and bankruptcies with undisclosed assets.

The court found both parties lacked credibility, except for their son, Montana Debren (Third Party), who was drawn into the litigation.

Kevin Debren's counterclaim for beneficial ownership or compensation for property improvements was dismissed due to a lack of credible evidence and the vesting of pre-discharge claims in his trustee in bankruptcy.

Kathie Debren was declared entitled to possession of the cottage, subject to conditions imposed by her trustee in bankruptcy to ensure creditor payment.

Kevin Debren's third-party claim against Montana Debren was also dismissed.

The applicant, charged with sexual assault, brought an application under s. 11(b) of the Charter for a stay of proceedings due to unreasonable delay.

The total delay from the swearing of the information to the scheduled trial date was 26.35 months, exceeding the 18-month presumptive ceiling established in R. v. Jordan.

The court deducted 194 days of defence delay, including time for not promptly scheduling pre-trials and a trial scheduling conference, and 101 days for the delay in notifying the Crown of the 11(b) application.

Despite the remaining net delay of 19.98 months still exceeding the ceiling, the court found the Crown could not rely on the pandemic backlog as an exceptional circumstance because it failed to take steps to mitigate the delay once notified of the 11(b) issue.

The application was granted, and the charge was stayed.

The plaintiff brought an uncontested trial for default judgment against the defendant for defamation and the tort of placing her in a false light, arising from videos posted on social media.

The court found that while the defamation claim failed due to lack of evidence of publication on WhatsApp, the plaintiff established liability for the false light tort because it was reasonably foreseeable the false videos would be shared.

The court awarded the plaintiff $5,000 in general damages and $30,390 in special damages for lost income, plus substantial indemnity costs.