John A. Olah

The Crown brought an application before the Superior Court of Justice to quash subpoenas issued by the defendant for three witnesses in an ongoing Provincial Offences Act trial.

The court confirmed that a Justice of the Peace lacks jurisdiction to quash a subpoena, which must be done via certiorari in the Superior Court, though a trial justice may excuse a witness whose evidence is irrelevant.

Applying the test of whether the witnesses were likely to give material evidence, the court quashed the subpoenas for the conservation authority's head and solicitor, finding their proposed evidence irrelevant or a fishing expedition.

The court declined to quash the subpoena for the hydrology expert who had already testified, leaving it to the trial justice to manage his recall and document production.

The Crown brought a motion to quash a Notice of Appeal and Judicial Review Application commenced by the defendant's wife in her personal capacity.

The defendant was on trial for offences under the Conservation Authorities Act.

The wife, acting as his agent, had unsuccessfully sought standing as a party to the litigation and a mistrial based on reasonable apprehension of bias.

The court granted the motion to quash, finding no statutory jurisdiction for an interlocutory appeal under the Provincial Offences Act, and that the wife had no standing to bring an appeal in her personal capacity.

The request for judicial review was also quashed as the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction without a request for urgency.

Following a successful summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s personal injury claim arising from a ski accident, the defendant sought costs of the motion and action.

The plaintiff argued that no costs should be awarded due to his impecuniosity.

The court considered the factors under Rule 57.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act.

While acknowledging the plaintiff’s low income, the court held that impecuniosity alone does not justify avoiding the normal costs consequences, particularly where the plaintiff rejected a settlement offer and attempted to leverage litigation costs during negotiations.

Partial indemnity costs of $63,000 were awarded to the defendant, with half payable immediately and the remainder stayed for 24 months.

The plaintiff sued the defendant ski resort for negligence after fracturing his clavicle by colliding with a fluorescent orange mesh ribbon used to close a ski run at night.

The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing there was no negligence and relying on a signed liability waiver.

The court granted the motion, finding no genuine issue requiring a trial.

Using enhanced fact-finding powers, the court determined the obstacle was clearly visible, snow-making equipment was not operating, and the plaintiff failed to keep a proper lookout.

Furthermore, the court held that the liability waiver signed by the plaintiff was prominently displayed, fully enforceable, and provided a complete defence to the claim.