K. Bailey

The plaintiffs brought a motion to provisionally strike the defendants' jury notices in a motor vehicle accident claim due to anticipated trial delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court noted the significant backlog of civil jury trials in Windsor and the prejudice the plaintiffs would suffer from further delay, particularly regarding the statutory reduction of pre-trial income loss.

The court granted the motion, ordering the matter to proceed as a judge-alone trial unless civil jury trials resume in Windsor by the scheduled trial date.

The defendants brought a motion seeking production of a future care cost report and an income loss report from the plaintiff's 2007 motor vehicle accident benefits file.

The plaintiff had sued for injuries sustained in a 2011 slip and fall.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the requested reports were predicated on medical assumptions and had no relevance since the prior medical reports had already been disclosed to the defendants' experts.

The accused applied for a bail review of a detention order on charges including possession for the purpose of trafficking and firearms offences.

The accused argued the justice of the peace erred by overemphasizing the strength of the Crown's case and that there were material changes in circumstances, including a new release plan, withdrawn charges, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding the initial decision was not clearly inappropriate and the new circumstances, including the pandemic, would not have affected the balancing exercise given the accused's young age, health, and the unsuitability of a proposed surety.

The accused was charged with the first degree murder of her severely disabled daughter.

The defence brought an application for a directed verdict of acquittal on the charge of first degree murder, conceding there was evidence for second degree murder but arguing there was no evidence of planning and deliberation.

The court reviewed the evidence, including the accused's fabricated story of a home invasion, the staging of the crime scene, and the mode of killing by asphyxiation.

The court held that the complexity of the fabricated story and the staging of the scene provided sufficient circumstantial evidence from which a jury could infer that the killing was planned and deliberate.

The application for a directed verdict was dismissed.

The accused is charged with the first-degree murder of her severely disabled daughter.

The Crown brought an application to use a couch and a mannequin as demonstrative evidence during the testimony of a firefighter who first discovered the victim.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the firefighter could clearly describe the victim's position without the props, meaning the demonstrative evidence had minimal probative value.

Furthermore, the court held that using the props carried a real risk of prejudicial effect by potentially overemphasizing the victim's initial position or artificially inflating the witness's credibility.

The Crown sought to admit several statements made by the accused to first responders and police following the death of her severely disabled daughter.

The defence conceded there were no threats or inducements but argued the accused lacked an operating mind and that the police failed to keep an accurate record of the utterances.

The court found that the accused's responses were appropriate and demonstrated she had the minimum cognitive ability to understand what she was saying and to whom.

The court also held that the lack of complete recordings went to the weight of the statements, not their admissibility, and ruled all statements admissible.

The plaintiff condominium corporation brought a motion for summary judgment against its former property manager and several related companies for fraud, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty.

The plaintiff alleged that the individual defendant orchestrated a massive fraud by rigging the tender process for repair work, falsifying contracts, and submitting invoices for work that was never performed.

The court found that the plaintiff's evidence overwhelmingly established the fraud and that the defendants' responding evidence was of no probative value.

Summary judgment was granted in favour of the plaintiff for over $1.3 million in damages, plus full indemnity costs.