John Douglas Ewart

The appellants appealed a Superior Court judgment regarding a cottage property lease, arguing for the first time on appeal that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction because the Residential Tenancies Act applied and gave exclusive jurisdiction to the Landlord and Tenant Board.

The Court of Appeal held that the Superior Court had jurisdiction over the equitable and monetary relief claimed, which exceeded the Board's jurisdiction.

The Court further declined to allow the appellants to raise the new statutory argument on appeal, citing the lack of a factual record, prejudice to the respondents, and the interests of finality.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment finding that work performed by the respondent was referable to an oral agreement to transfer properties to him.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge's finding was supported by uncontradicted evidence and there was no basis to interfere.

The appellant appealed from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal which allowed the Crown's appeal from the acquittal of the accused on a charge of fraud.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the conclusion and reasons of the Court of Appeal for Ontario regarding the admissibility of computer-produced bank statements under the Canada Evidence Act.

The appellant was convicted of fraud, breach of trust, and theft relating to construction funds.

He appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing he was not a trustee under the Mechanics' Lien Act and that the verdicts were incompatible.

The Court allowed the appeal in part, quashing the breach of trust conviction because the Crown specifically charged him as 'being a trustee' rather than as an aider and abettor, and failed to prove that averment.

The convictions for theft and fraud were upheld as they were not incompatible.

The appellant was acquitted at trial on a charge of fraud relating to an insurance claim for a vehicle he allegedly arranged to be stolen, after certain evidence was ruled inadmissible as hearsay.

The Court of Appeal quashed the acquittal and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the Court of Appeal that there was evidence upon which a conviction could be entered.