John J. Winter

The appellant appealed a motion judge's decision setting aside a final order based on Minutes of Settlement in a family law dispute.

The parties had negotiated a settlement, but there was a dispute over whether a binding agreement had been reached before the respondent entered a residential treatment program.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's finding that the parties were not ad idem and that the June Minutes of Settlement were no longer open for acceptance when the appellant signed them in October.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant and respondent entered into a separation agreement where the respondent agreed to buy the appellant's interest in the matrimonial home for $225,000.

The respondent paid $100,000 but went bankrupt before paying the remaining $125,000.

The appellant sought to characterize the remaining debt as spousal support.

The motion judge refused, finding the agreement clearly characterized the payment as property division.

The Court of Appeal agreed and dismissed the appeal, noting the appellant was not precluded from bringing a variation motion on proper materials.

The applicant ratepayer sought a mandatory order (mandamus) to compel the respondent municipality to enforce its by-laws regarding sight lines at two intersections.

The municipality had inspected the intersections and determined they were not hazardous.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that a municipality cannot be compelled by mandamus to enforce a by-law enacted under a discretionary power, and courts should not interfere with the exercise of municipal discretion.

The appellant appealed a decision regarding the interpretation of s. 9(1) ¶ 8 of the Tobacco Control Act and the authority of municipalities to enact smoking bylaws.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the lower court that the appellant's interpretation would render other provisions redundant and contradict established jurisprudence on municipal authority to enact such bylaws.