E. Treslan

The defendants brought a summary judgment motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' action for property damage caused by flooding as statute-barred.

The plaintiffs' farm flooded in 2015 after the defendants altered their tile drainage system.

The plaintiffs petitioned the municipality for a municipal drain in 2016 and commenced their action in 2018 after learning the drain project was uncertain.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the limitation period was postponed under s. 5(1)(a)(iv) of the Limitations Act because the plaintiffs were engaged in an alternative administrative process (the municipal drain petition) that made litigation premature.

Following a seven-day construction lien trial where the plaintiff recovered a modest amount but the defendants succeeded on the key issue of defective workmanship, the court determined costs.

Both parties had advanced unreasonable positions at times, but the plaintiff's initial intransigence and failure to acknowledge obvious deficiencies were significant factors.

The court awarded the defendants $15,000 in costs, to be set off against the plaintiff's trial judgment.

The plaintiff contractor sued the defendant homeowners for the unpaid balance of a contract to build the shell of a log home, registering a construction lien against the property.

The defendants counterclaimed, alleging numerous construction deficiencies, incomplete work, and Building Code violations.

After a seven-day trial involving multiple expert witnesses, the court found that the plaintiff had breached the contract through poor workmanship and unauthorized deviations from the plans.

The court reduced the plaintiff's claim by the cost of necessary repairs and awarded the defendants damages for delay, resulting in a net judgment for the plaintiff of $30,595.63.

The mother brought a motion seeking a parenting schedule she argued would better reflect the intent of a prior final order providing for near equal parenting time.

The father opposed the motion and sought enforcement of the existing order, an order directing mediation pursuant to the dispute‑resolution clause in the order, and an order striking portions of the mother's affidavit that disclosed settlement negotiations.

The court held that settlement communications included in the affidavit were privileged and abusive to disclose and struck the relevant paragraph.

The court emphasized that parties who agree to mediation as a precondition to litigation should ordinarily be held to that obligation.

However, given the impending expiry of the existing schedule and the need for certainty for the child, the court imposed a parenting schedule for 2013 consistent with the parameters of the prior order.

In matrimonial litigation involving equalization claims and control of a seasonal motel business, the husband sought authorization to complete an agreement of purchase and sale of the property to a third‑party purchaser, disclosure from the court‑appointed receiver, and temporary permission to travel outside Canada to attend his mother's funeral.

The court found the purchaser to be a bona fide arm’s‑length third party and held the negotiated purchase price reasonable given the business’s financial losses, receivership, and lack of competing offers.

The court granted disclosure from the receiver and permitted the husband to travel subject to security conditions due to support and costs arrears.

It further ordered the wife to remove the matrimonial home designation and authorized completion of the sale with proceeds to be paid into court pending resolution of the family claims.