5 total
The court adjourned a summary judgment motion and ordered a venue transfer to Toronto due to improper forum shopping.
The plaintiff, Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC), brought a debt collection action against Winston Ang in Halton Region.
The court found no logical connection to Halton Region and, following the precedent in The Toronto-Dominion Bank v. The Other End Inc. et al., 2025 ONSC 85, ordered the matter transferred to Toronto Region.
The motion for summary judgment was adjourned sine die, and a related 2023 action against Mr. Ang was dismissed without costs and without prejudice.
The court granted an unopposed motion for judgment to enforce a settlement agreement, awarding substantial indemnity costs.
The plaintiffs brought a motion for judgment based on a settlement agreement.
The defendants did not appear or file any materials.
The court granted judgment to the plaintiffs against Patricia Giankas for the remaining amount owing ($20,000) plus pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, and awarded costs to the plaintiffs on a substantial indemnity basis.
Motion to consolidate four actions arising from a franchise dispute granted over one defendant's objection.
The plaintiffs brought a motion to consolidate four separate actions arising from a franchise dispute, including claims against the franchisor, accountants, and lawyers.
All parties consented except for one defendant accountant.
The court applied Rule 6.01 and found that the actions shared common questions of fact and arose from the same series of transactions, specifically the plaintiffs' reliance on allegedly inaccurate financial statements.
The court granted the motion to consolidate the actions and ordered that a related third-party claim be heard at the same time or immediately after the consolidated action.
Motion to compel answers to discovery refusals and documentary production granted against defendant municipality.
The plaintiffs brought a motion to compel the defendant Township of Oro-Medonte to answer questions refused at an examination for discovery, produce Standard Operating Procedures, and re-attend discovery.
The defendant argued leave was required because the matter had been set down for trial.
The court found leave was not required as the motion record was served before the trial record, but would have granted leave regardless.
The court ordered the defendant to answer the refused questions, produce the requested documents, and have its representative re-attend discovery at its own expense, finding the requested information relevant to whether the defendant acted reasonably in its response to the downed hydro wires.
Defamation action over online reviews dismissed as a SLAPP suit; full indemnity costs awarded.
The plaintiffs sued the defendants for defamation over negative online reviews regarding window installation.
Faced with an anti-SLAPP motion, the plaintiffs attempted to discontinue the action.
The court held that the statutory stay under s. 137.1(5) of the Courts of Justice Act was triggered when the defendants delivered a requisition to attend Civil Practice Court, rendering the discontinuance ineffective.
Applying the Pointes framework, the court found the reviews related to a matter of public interest, the plaintiffs failed to show there were no valid defences, and the action was a SLAPP suit brought for an improper purpose.
The action was dismissed, and the plaintiffs were ordered to pay $164,186.76 in full indemnity costs and $2,500 in damages.
