Sarah Pepall

The appellants appealed a trial judgment finding them liable for arrears owing under three vehicle leases that had been assigned to the respondent.

The appellants argued that because they did not receive written notice of the lease assignments, the respondent was required to join the assignor as a party to the action.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that while the assignor perhaps should have been joined, the appellants had actual notice of the assignment and suffered no prejudice.

The Court also rejected arguments that the trial judge violated the collateral fact rule during cross-examination and erred in her credibility assessments.

The parents appealed a summary judgment order granting Crown wardship of their four children and denying them access.

The Court of Appeal upheld the Crown wardship, finding it in the children's best interests.

The court also upheld the no-access order but outlined a therapeutic process that could lead to future access if the children desired it and professionals agreed.

An alternate plan of care proposing the children move to France was rejected.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his application for an assessment of his former solicitor's bills under the Solicitors Act.

The application judge found no 'special circumstances' to justify assessing the 12 paid bills, which were rendered over four years.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in principle or unreasonable result in the application judge's conclusion that the appellant failed to rebut the presumption that payment indicated acceptance of the accounts.