John Zuber

The appellant appealed from a jury trial decision, arguing that the respondent's counsel made a misstatement of law during the opening statement.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's immediate correction and explicit jury charge were sufficient to cure the error and ensure a fair trial.

Other complaints regarding the opening statement were also dismissed as not serious enough to warrant striking the jury.

The appeal was dismissed with costs fixed at $5,000.

The appellants appealed a trial judgment awarding damages for the loss of the respondents' research materials, which were damaged by water escaping from the appellants' above-ground pool.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's assessment of damages based on the cost of replacing the research, as the materials had significant value for continuing research and academic teaching.

The court also upheld the costs order in favour of a third party insurer.

The appellant father appealed an order varying a joint custody arrangement to grant sole custody to the respondent mother and significantly reducing his access.

The father argued the trial judge exceeded her jurisdiction by granting relief not explicitly requested in the pleadings.

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge was entitled to rely on a consent order directing a custody assessment as defining the issues between the parties.

The Court upheld the sole custody order due to worsening conflict between the parents but found the substantial reduction in the father's access was not justified by the evidence.

The appeal was allowed in part to restore the father's access to four overnight visits in alternating weeks.