Massimo Rovazzi

The appellant appealed a judgment regarding the interpretation of a mortgage provision.

The applications judge concluded that interest for one year was payable from the date of the registration of the mortgage, even though the full funds were not advanced.

The Court of Appeal found no basis to interfere with this conclusion and noted there was no language limiting the use of funds to finance an improvement on the land.

The appeal was dismissed with costs fixed at $5,500.

The Court of Appeal previously dismissed an appeal and cross-appeal, initially indicating there would be no order as to costs due to divided success.

However, the respondent by cross-appeal submitted that he was entirely successful, as his only involvement was responding to the cross-appeal.

The Court agreed, finding no reason to depart from the usual rule that costs follow the event.

The fact that another party may have paid his legal fees did not deprive him of his claim for costs.

Costs of the cross-appeal were fixed at $5,000 on a partial indemnity basis plus disbursements.

The appellants appealed and the respondent cross-appealed a trial judgment regarding the equalization of net family properties.

The issues on appeal included the valuation of a property known as Block 108, the trial judge's finding of undisclosed assets, the deduction of notional income tax on the deemed disposition of shares, and the beneficial ownership of various properties.

The Court of Appeal found no basis to interfere with the trial judge's findings of fact, assessments of credibility, or exercise of discretion.

Both the appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed.