Who is John Arthur Kirby?

John Arthur Kirby is an Ontario lawyer (Retired) with 3 court cases on record from 2012 to 2016. Practice areas include wills, estates, trusts law, real estate law.

What courts has John Arthur Kirby appeared in?

John Arthur Kirby has appeared in Superior Court of Justice.

What areas does John Arthur Kirby practice in?

John Arthur Kirby practices in wills, estates, trusts law, real estate law, based on 3 court appearances across Ontario.

How many cases has John Arthur Kirby handled?

John Arthur Kirby has 3 cases on record from 2012 to 2016.

What judges has John Arthur Kirby appeared before?

John Arthur Kirby has most frequently appeared before Justice E. Kruzick, Justice Russell M. Raikes.

John Arthur Kirby

3 total

Miller v. Miller, 2016 ONSC 5734

The applicant father brought a motion seeking interim joint custody with primary residence of the children with him, citing the children's unhappiness with the respondent mother.

The respondent mother opposed the motion and brought a cross-motion for a further Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) report.

The court dismissed the applicant's motion, expressing significant concerns about potential parental alienation by the father and the manipulation of the children.

The court granted the order for a further OCL report and urged both parties to seek counselling and improve communication.

SCJSep 13, 2016

Respondent Counsel

Parker v. Yundt et al., 2012 ONSC 7143

Following a prior costs endorsement, self-represented respondents sought leave to file a reply and requested reconsideration of the court’s costs determination.

The underlying application sought a declaration regarding the validity of several leases and had been dismissed, resulting in success for the respondents.

The self-represented respondents argued they should receive compensation for time spent preparing and attending the proceeding.

Applying Rule 57.04(4) of the Rules of Civil Procedure and the principles in Fong v. Chan, the court held that costs for self-represented litigants are only appropriate where the work performed is equivalent to that ordinarily done by counsel.

The court found the respondents’ activities did not meet that threshold and declined to alter the previous costs award.

SCJDec 13, 2012

Applicant Counsel

Parker v. Yundt et al., 2012 ONSC 5785

Self‑represented litigants sought costs after successfully defending an application concerning the validity of several leases.

The court applied the principles from Fong v. Chan governing costs for self‑represented parties, which require proof that the litigant performed work ordinarily done by counsel and incurred an opportunity cost by foregoing remunerative activity.

The applicants failed to demonstrate that they performed lawyer‑like work or suffered a compensable opportunity cost.

However, limited disbursements directly related to the proceeding were allowed.

The court awarded only $476.91 in recoverable disbursements and otherwise dismissed the claim for costs.

Respondent Counsel