Robert J. Baldwin

The defendant municipality brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff contractor's action for additional compensation arising from unexpected subsurface soil conditions during a sewer construction project.

The municipality argued the claim was barred by the contract's strict notice provisions, a release executed by the contractor, and the expiry of the two-year limitation period.

The court dismissed the motion, finding genuine issues for trial on all three grounds due to an insufficient evidentiary record provided by the municipality, particularly regarding the parties' course of conduct, the scope of the release's exceptions, and the exact date the claim was discovered.

The appellant appealed an order striking out his statement of claim without leave to amend and dismissing his action against two police officers.

The action arose from his alleged mistreatment when suspected of shoplifting.

The motion judge had struck the claim for failing to concisely state material facts, containing scandalous and embarrassing content, and disclosing no reasonable cause of action.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the motion judge's reasons and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant pleaded guilty to a Highway Traffic Act offence and was fined.

Due to a clerical error by the justice of the peace, the committal warrant incorrectly stated the appellant was sentenced to a one-year term of imprisonment, leading to his arrest and alleged assault in jail.

The appellant sued the justice of the peace, correctional officers, and others for wrongful arrest and imprisonment.

The motions judge struck the claims against the justice of the peace and correctional officers.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant failed to plead malice or bad faith with particularity as required to overcome judicial immunity.