Frank Perruccio

Following a successful application in which the applicant was awarded $200,000 from the estate of his deceased brother and/or from the respondent widow personally on the basis of conversion of trust assets, the court fixed costs of the entire proceeding on a full indemnity basis.

The respondent, who acted as estate trustee and sole beneficiary of her late husband's estate, consistently defied court orders, refused to provide accountings, launched multiple unsuccessful interlocutory proceedings, remained self-represented despite orders requiring her to retain counsel, and failed to pay $21,000 in previously-ordered costs.

The court found her conduct constituted an egregious disregard for the court and the rule of law, warranting full indemnity costs.

Costs were fixed at $195,543.68 inclusive of all prior costs awards, jointly and severally payable by the respondent in her personal and representative capacities within 60 days.

The court further declared that the real property subject to a Certificate of Pending Litigation was available to satisfy both the $200,000 judgment and the costs award.

The applicant failed to comply with a prior court order requiring her to pay outstanding costs and appoint counsel of record.

Consequently, the respondents moved informally to dismiss her motion for leave to appeal.

The court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.

Additionally, finding that the applicant's motion was frivolous and part of a pattern of abusive conduct designed to prevent the matter from being heard on its merits, the court revoked her fee waiver under s. 4.10 of the Administration of Justice Act and prohibited her from making further fee waiver requests in the proceedings without prior judicial permission.

The self-represented applicant sought leave to appeal a procedural order that required her to retain counsel for her late husband's estate and herself.

The applicant refused to comply with previous court orders, insisting she did not need counsel and that the estate was not involved.

The court ordered the applicant to retain counsel, comply with previous costs orders, and pay $1,000 in costs for the unnecessary case conference.

The court also raised concerns about the applicant's abuse of fee waivers and invited submissions on whether her fee waiver should be cancelled.

The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal an earlier order.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs of $5,000 to the responding party.

The court also directed the responding party to bring this endorsement and a prior case management direction to the attention of the judge hearing the upcoming application for directions.

The self-represented moving party in an estate administration dispute sought to appeal and judicially review an interlocutory order of a Superior Court judge.

The Divisional Court struck the application for judicial review, noting it lacks jurisdiction to review decisions of a Superior Court judge.

The court also struck the Notice of Appeal, as the underlying order was interlocutory and required leave to appeal.

The court stayed a paragraph of the underlying order that vaguely permitted the responding party to retrieve personal belongings, finding it unenforceable.

The court also clarified that provisions waiving privilege and confidentiality were subject to the rights of non-parties to raise objections.

The Pay Equity Hearings Tribunal issued case management directions in a dispute between the applicant union and the responding school board.

The Tribunal directed the scheduling of three hearing dates and established a timeline for the responding party to pursue a timeliness objection.

The Tribunal further ordered that the hearing on the merits be bifurcated to first determine whether the parties are locked into the PDQ date for calculating retroactive pay equity adjustments, and set deadlines for the exchange of documents and witness statements.