3 total
The court granted a consent motion to transfer a collection action to Toronto, emphasizing that venue must be rationally connected to the dispute and condemning forum shopping.
The court granted a consent motion to transfer a collection action brought by The Toronto-Dominion Bank from London (Middlesex) to Toronto.
The decision reviews the legal principles for change of venue under Rule 13.1.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, emphasizing the need for a rational connection between the chosen venue and the subject matter of the proceeding.
The court found that all relevant events, parties, and interests were connected to Toronto, and that London had no rational connection to the dispute.
The decision also addresses the broader issue of forum shopping and its impact on judicial resources.
The court adjourned a bank's summary judgment motion to allow a venue transfer motion.
The Toronto-Dominion Bank sought summary judgment against the defendants for loan and credit card defaults.
The defendants opposed, arguing the London venue was inappropriate due to lack of local connection and that the motion was premature given potential government guarantees.
The court, noting concerns about "forum shopping" by financial institutions, adjourned the plaintiff's summary judgment motion to allow the defendants to bring a formal motion to transfer the proceeding to Toronto, and also acknowledged the prematurity argument.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with costs of $5,000.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal the order of Hilliard J. dated August 22, 2023.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs of $5,000 to the responding party.
