G. Cook

This decision concerns a dispute over the legal and beneficial ownership of lands surrendered by several First Nations to Canada in 1908, known as the Unsold Surrendered Lands (USL), including the Point Park and associated roads in Fort Frances, Ontario.

The Town of Fort Frances sought summary judgment declaring it the owner of these lands or, alternatively, a public trust or entitlement to damages.

The First Nations, Canada, and Ontario opposed, seeking dismissal of the Town’s claims.

The court found that the Agency One Reserve was a validly created reserve, that the 1908 Order-in-Council (OIC) did not convey the USL to the Town by fee simple or public trust, and that the Town’s claims to the lands, roads, and damages were without merit.

The Town’s motion was dismissed, and the counterclaim struck.

A family law trial concerning custody, access, and child support for three young children.

The applicant sought sole custody and primary residence with specified access for the respondent.

The respondent sought sole custody with supervised access for the applicant and child support from the applicant.

The trial proceeded in the absence of the respondent despite proper notice.

The court granted sole custody and primary residence to the applicant based on the applicant's evidence, affidavits from collateral witnesses, and a report from the Office of the Children's Lawyer.

The court found that joint custody was inappropriate given the parties' inability to communicate effectively and evidence of the respondent's harassing behavior during access exchanges.

Child support was ordered based on the respondent's declared income.

The applicant mother sought retroactive child support, section 7 expenses, imputation of income, property division, and a restraining order following the parties' separation.

The court found the respondent father was intentionally under-employed and had hidden cash income, imputing his income at $40,000.

The court ordered retroactive child support, directed the sale or buyout of a jointly owned property, and issued a restraining order due to the respondent's history of domestic violence and ongoing hostility.

The defendant was charged with three counts of assault—one against his stepson and two against his wife.

The Crown alleged that during the five or six days the defendant and his newly arrived wife (sponsored through an arranged marriage) lived together in Canada, he engaged in abusive behavior including pushing, grabbing, and verbal abuse.

The defendant denied all allegations, asserting that he had invested significant funds to bring his wife and stepson to Canada and had no motive to harm them.

The court found the complainant's evidence concerning but problematic, particularly regarding her motives for reporting to police.

The stepson's evidence was deemed unreliable due to inconsistencies with his police statement and concerns about potential coaching.

The defendant's evidence, corroborated by his cousin's testimony, was not seriously shaken on cross-examination.

The court acquitted the defendant on all remaining charges.