Ian Russell Peddle

The defendant brought a motion to discharge a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) that the plaintiff had obtained ex parte on a property.

The CPL was based on a 2010 Rent-to-Own Agreement, which required the plaintiff to make payments beyond rent and arrange financing within three to five years.

The plaintiff failed to comply with these terms and did not pursue the purchase option for many years.

The court found no reasonable claim to an interest in land and no triable issue, noting that any alleged improvements could be addressed by way of damages.

The motion to discharge the CPL was granted, and the court invited costs submissions from the defendant.

The law firm Teplitsky, Colson LLP sued its former clients, the Seiderers, for unpaid legal fees and other claims (breach of contract, misrepresentation, deceit, unjust enrichment, punitive damages, and a charging order/lien), after the Seiderers initiated a bill assessment under the Solicitors Act.

The law firm moved to stay the assessment and for leave to prosecute its action nunc pro tunc.

The Seiderers cross-moved to stay the law firm's action pending the assessment.

The court found no genuine dispute about the retainer that would oust the assessment officer's jurisdiction, concluding the core dispute was about the quantum of fees.

The court dismissed the law firm's motion and granted the Seiderers' cross-motion, staying the law firm's action pending the assessment, and ordered the Seiderers to disclose and pay settlement funds into court.