Herschel Gold

The Catholic Children's Aid Society brought a summary judgment motion for final orders regarding the child E., including joint custody to the father and paternal grandmother, decision-making authority to the father, and discretionary supervised access for the mother.

The mother opposed, seeking joint custody and generous unsupervised access.

The court applied the Hryniak framework for summary judgment, with the caution required in child protection cases (Kawartha principles).

The court found no genuine issue requiring a trial, noting the mother's untreated mental health issues, history of instability, and failure to engage with services.

The court granted the Society's requested orders, finding them to be in the child's best interests, and dismissed the mother's opposing requests.

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's action, which sought $14 million in damages for various torts including fraud, breach of confidence, and conspiracy.

The plaintiff alleged the defendants conspired with the Canada Revenue Agency to falsely accuse him of tax evasion, leading to his wrongful conviction, and illegally transferred his Teraview software license.

The court granted the motion, finding the software claims were barred by the two-year limitation period under the Limitations Act, 2002.

The remaining claims, characterized as malicious prosecution, failed because the proceedings were initiated by the CRA and resulted in the plaintiff's conviction, not a termination in his favour.

This application concerned the interpretation of an agreement of purchase and sale (APS) and its Tarion Addendum after a residential property transaction failed to close.

The court found that the vendor breached the APS by failing to deliver an Occupancy Permit by the firm closing date and by purporting to terminate the agreement based on invalid interim closing dates.

The court emphasized the consumer protection objectives of the Tarion Addendum, requiring strict adherence to its provisions for changing critical dates and setting delayed closing dates.

Attempts by counsel to informally extend closing dates were deemed voidable by the purchaser and ineffective against the statutory framework.

The purchaser was declared not in breach, and the vendor's termination was invalid.

Remedies for specific performance or damages were deferred to a later proceeding.

The parents appealed a motion judge's order dismissing their appeal of a Crown wardship decision for delay.

The parents argued the motion judge failed to consider the merits of their appeal and breached their right to a fair hearing by denying an adjournment.

The Court of Appeal found that while the motion judge should have explicitly addressed the merits, a review of the record showed the parents' appeal raised only factual disputes with no palpable and overriding error.

Given the lack of merit and the child's need for stability, the appeal was dismissed.

The accused was charged with trafficking in cocaine, possession of proceeds of crime, possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of a prohibited weapon following an undercover drug investigation.

The Crown relied primarily on an undercover officer’s identification of the accused as the seller during a brief drug transaction and on drugs allegedly discovered during a later arrest.

The court held that the identification process was unreliable due to the short observation period, inconsistent descriptions, and suggestive identification circumstances.

The court also found serious inconsistencies in the police evidence concerning the search and alleged discovery of drugs during the arrest.

Given these evidentiary weaknesses, the Crown failed to prove the offences beyond a reasonable doubt.