John William Ernest Gilbert

The plaintiff, Craig Johnston, sought substantial indemnity costs after successfully suing the defendant Municipality for wrongful termination, being awarded damages for breach of contract, punitive damages, and aggravated damages.

The Municipality did not dispute entitlement to costs but argued for partial indemnity or a lower full recovery amount.

The court awarded Johnston costs on a substantial indemnity basis, primarily due to the Municipality's failure to make a reasonable settlement offer and Johnston's successful offer.

However, the court reduced the quantum sought by Johnston from approximately $260,000 to $160,000, finding the higher amount disproportionate to the non-exemplary damages awarded.

The plaintiff, Craig Johnston, Chief Building Official for the Municipality of Arran-Elderslie, was summarily dismissed for alleged conflict of interest and deceit.

The Municipality claimed just cause based on Johnston designing and inspecting projects within the Municipality and allegedly concealing these conflicts.

The court found that Johnston was indeed in a conflict of interest but that the Municipality was estopped from relying on it due to its prior knowledge and approval of his private design work and its failure to appoint a backup inspector.

The court also found no evidence of deceit or fraud on Johnston's part.

The dismissal was deemed wrongful, and the court awarded damages for breach of contract, aggravated damages for the bad faith manner of dismissal, and punitive damages for the high-handed conduct of the Municipality.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment concerning spousal support, child support, and equalization of net family property.

The appellant achieved partial success on appeal by increasing spousal and child support and eliminating a termination date for spousal support imposed by the trial judge.

However, the appellant was unsuccessful in overturning the trial judge's conclusions regarding equalization of net family property, which was a matter of substantial financial significance.

The Court of Appeal varied the trial judge's costs award from $10,000 to $7,000 in favour of the respondent and ordered each party to bear their own costs of the appeal.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment in matrimonial proceedings, challenging the trial judge's findings on unjust enrichment, the exclusion of a farm as a gift, retroactive child support, spousal support duration, and post-separation obligations.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that the farm was a gift and that unjust enrichment was limited to the bungalow.

However, the Court found the trial judge erred by imposing a strict three-year limit on retroactive child support under D.B.S., extending it back to the date of formal notice.

The Court also found the trial judge erred by arbitrarily terminating spousal support after five years, removing the termination date and increasing the quantum in accordance with the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines.

The appellant appealed a motion judge's order enforcing the terms of a settlement reached during mediation.

The appellant argued that he wanted to seek a second opinion before finalizing the settlement.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no basis to interfere with the motion judge's conclusion that a binding settlement had been reached while the appellant was represented by counsel.

The appellants own a property with a registered right of way over the respondents' lands to the edge of Chesley Lake.

The appellants built a pole dock on the lakebed at the water's edge where the right of way ends.

The respondents sued, arguing that using the right of way to access the dock was beyond the scope of the easement.

The trial judge agreed, finding the easement was limited to agricultural purposes and that accessing the dock was an overburdening use.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the grant of the right of way was not confined to a particular use and that accessing the dock from the shoreline did not constitute an overburdening use of the right of way.