Ryan Bodnar

The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court decision dismissing his claim for $30,000 against the respondents.

The appellant sought indemnification for legal costs incurred in defending a separate, unrelated lawsuit, relying on a Memorandum of Settlement and release signed with the respondents.

He also claimed damages for negligence and mental distress.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge correctly applied the principles of contract interpretation from Sattva and Corner Brook to conclude the indemnity did not cover unforeseeable future claims.

The court also upheld the trial judge's dismissal of the negligence claim due to a lack of evidence establishing a standard of care, and found no error in the discretionary assessment of costs.

The moving party, a towing company, sought a stay of a decision by the Licence Appeal Tribunal confirming the cancellation of its commercial vehicle operator's registration pending an appeal.

The cancellation was based on a poor safety rating and the safety records of related parties involved in an unclosed sale of the business.

Applying the RJR-MacDonald test, the court found a serious issue to be tried but concluded that the public interest in highway safety outweighed the potential financial harm to the moving party.

The motion for a stay was dismissed.

The applicant sought judicial review of the Minister's decision to exercise a five percent road reservation on his property pursuant to the Public Lands Act.

The applicant argued that the Minister miscalculated the land available, acted for an improper purpose, and denied him procedural fairness.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the Minister had broad discretion under the Act, the decision to ensure public access was reasonable, and the applicant was afforded adequate consultation and reasons.