G. Eldon Horner

The applicant sought to validate an informal, unwitnessed document dated December 31, 2021, as a will or codicil of the deceased, Garnet Earl Rombough, under section 21.1 of the Succession Law Reform Act.

The deceased had a formal will from 2012.

Respondents challenged the 2021 document, alleging lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud, and forgery.

The court found the 2021 document authentic, made with testamentary capacity, and free from undue influence or fraud.

It determined that the 2021 document, read in conjunction with the 2012 will, represented the deceased's final testamentary intentions, acting as a codicil to the earlier will.

The application was granted, and both documents were admitted to probate.

At a Case Management Conference, the United Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry brought a motion under s. 17(39)(b) of the Planning Act to bring into force and effect undisputed land use designations in its Comprehensive Official Plan across five townships.

The motion followed extensive discussions resolving appeals regarding the designation of lands as Agricultural Resource Lands versus Rural District.

The Tribunal accepted uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the revised mapping was consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and represented good planning.

The Tribunal granted the motion, bringing the undisputed schedules into force.

The Tribunal also granted a motion for directions clarifying that an appellant's appeal sought an aggregate reserve designation rather than an agricultural one.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of the United Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry 2018 Comprehensive Official Plan, the Township of South Glengarry brought a motion to bring into force parts of the Official Plan redesignating two properties from 'Agricultural Resource Lands' to 'Rural District'.

The Tribunal granted the motion on consent, relying on uncontroverted expert planning evidence that the redesignation was appropriate based on soil characteristics and conformed with the intent of the Official Plan.

The Tribunal also scheduled a further Case Management Conference to address the remaining appeals.

The plaintiff brought a motion for interim dependant support and exclusive possession of a home and vehicle from the estate of her deceased partner.

The defendant estate trustees, the deceased's daughters, opposed the motion, arguing the plaintiff was not a 'spouse' under the Succession Law Reform Act.

The court applied the Molodowich factors and found the plaintiff and the deceased had cohabited continuously for over three years and that she was financially dependent on him.

The court granted the plaintiff $2,000 per month in interim support and conditional interim possession of the home and vehicle.

The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court decision regarding the purchase of a coin collection, arguing it was a sale by description and that some coins were counterfeit.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal on the merits, finding the contract was for specific goods that the appellant had ample opportunity to examine, thus caveat emptor applied.

However, the court allowed the appeal regarding costs, varying the trial costs award to the $1,500 maximum permitted under s. 29 of the Courts of Justice Act.

The appellant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial judge's finding that he held a handgun, rather than an imitation, was unreasonable.

The Summary Conviction Appeal Court failed to squarely address this issue, but the Court of Appeal held that a reasonable trier of fact could conclude it was a handgun based on the complainant's belief, the description of the object, the appellant's conduct, and his threat to shoot.

The Court also found no error in the admission of bad character evidence as part of the narrative.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant employer sought review of an Order to Pay issued by an Employment Standards Officer.

Prior to the hearing, the employer and the Trustee in Bankruptcy for the employee reached a settlement for $1,419.35.

The Board ordered the Director to disburse the trust funds in accordance with the settlement, subject to any objection from the Ministry of Labour, and terminated the application.