Julia Alessandra Cecchetto

The court considered a motion to strike all claims against Patricia France, the former President of St. Clair College, in an action by Waseem Habash for breach of contract, defamation, injurious falsehood, and related torts.

The court partially granted the motion, striking only the claim for intentional interference with contractual and/or economic relations, but granted leave to amend the claim for inducing breach of contract.

The court found that the pleadings for defamation and injurious falsehood were sufficient to proceed, as was the claim for inducing breach of contract (subject to amendment), and that there was an arguable basis for personal liability against Ms. France.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment seeking compensation based on an alleged oral agreement for client referrals.

The defendant argued the agreement was for profit-sharing and that the matter was unsuitable for summary judgment due to disputed facts and credibility issues, particularly given the limitations on cross-examination under simplified procedure rules.

The court dismissed the plaintiff's motion, finding genuine issues requiring a trial, as the conflicting evidence regarding the oral agreement's terms and the parties' credibility could not be resolved on a summary judgment motion.

The defendant's counterclaim was dismissed by consent.

This appeal concerned a real estate transaction where the purchaser missed the closing payment deadline by 35 minutes, leading the vendor to terminate the contract based on a "time is of the essence" clause.

The appellant purchaser sought a declaration that the vendor breached the agreement and that the contract was unconscionable, also seeking damages.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the application judge's decision that the strict enforcement of the payment deadline was valid.

The court found no palpable and overriding error in the interpretation of the agreement, the application of the "time is of the essence" clause, or the finding that the contract was not unconscionable, emphasizing the clear contractual language and prior warnings given to the sophisticated parties.

This is a costs endorsement following a decision on two related applications.

The Umbrio Parties were partially successful in their application, securing a net payment of $69,256.

The court rejected the Leonardelli Parties' argument that their offer to settle, though close, should shift costs under Rule 49.13, finding the difference material.

The Umbrio Parties sought substantial indemnity costs, but the court awarded partial indemnity costs, stating that litigation complexity alone does not justify a higher scale.

For the cross-application, the court found divided success and awarded no costs.

Ultimately, the Umbrio Parties were awarded $40,000 in partial indemnity costs for their application.

The defendant brought a motion to set aside service of the statement of claim outside Ontario and to stay proceedings on the basis of forum non conveniens, arguing British Columbia was the more appropriate forum for a dispute involving alleged misuse of confidential employment information.

The plaintiff opposed, asserting Ontario was the proper forum.

The court dismissed the defendant's motion, finding that British Columbia was not clearly a more appropriate forum than Ontario.

The decision also addressed the inadmissibility of a late-filed supplementary affidavit and denied a request for split submissions between counsel and client.

This case involved cross-applications concerning the dissolution of a business partnership between two investment professionals, Rick Umbrio and Sandra Leonardelli, who co-owned Silveroak Wealth Management Inc. Disputes arose over post-closing adjustments to the purchase price for Leonardelli's shares, division of bank account balances, entitlement to commissions, and liabilities under a sublease agreement.

The court interpreted the Letter Agreement governing the transaction, applying principles of contractual interpretation to determine the correct post-closing adjustment for client assets under management (AUM) and the entitlement to commissions.

The court also addressed claims of breach of a sublease agreement.

The defendant, Rick Malatesta, brought a motion to strike portions of the plaintiff Lisa Taylor's Statement of Claim and Reply, arguing that they disclosed no reasonable cause of action against him personally, particularly for wrongful dismissal.

The plaintiff conceded the wrongful dismissal claim against Malatesta but sought to maintain a claim for intentional infliction of mental distress and punitive damages against him, and requested leave to amend her pleadings to clarify these claims.

The court dismissed the motion to strike the intentional infliction of mental distress claim, finding that the proposed amended claim adequately pleaded the necessary elements for this tort against Malatesta personally, and that corporate employees can be held personally liable for tortious conduct even if acting in the course of their duties.

The court granted leave to amend the Statement of Claim to clarify that the wrongful dismissal claim was against Chair Source only, and the intentional infliction of mental distress claim was against Mr. Malatesta only, with additional particulars.

The court awarded costs to the plaintiff, Lisa Taylor, due to the defendant's significant delay in bringing the motion and unreasonable conduct regarding settlement offers.