Who is Safina Lakhani?

Safina Lakhani is an Ontario lawyer with 4 court cases on record from 2014 to 2014.

What courts has Safina Lakhani appeared in?

Safina Lakhani has appeared in Superior Court of Justice, Court of Appeal, with most appearances at the Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Safina Lakhani handled?

Safina Lakhani has 4 cases on record from 2014 to 2014.

What judges has Safina Lakhani appeared before?

Safina Lakhani has most frequently appeared before Justice J. W. Sloan, Justice Weiler, Justice Rouleau.

Safina Lakhani

4 total

SA Horeca Financial Services et al. v. Light, 2014 ONCA 811

The plaintiffs obtained a judgment against the defendant in Belgium and subsequently sought to enforce it in Ontario after discovering the defendant had moved to Canada.

After the plaintiffs obtained summary judgment recognizing the foreign judgment, the defendant appealed, triggering an automatic stay of enforcement.

The plaintiffs brought a motion to lift the stay and for security for costs.

The Court of Appeal partially lifted the stay to allow the plaintiffs to examine the defendant in aid of execution, finding the appeal appeared frivolous and the plaintiffs had suffered hardship due to delay.

The motion for security for costs was dismissed as there was insufficient evidence that the defendant lacked assets in Ontario.

ONCANov 17, 2014

Respondent Counsel

Clare Endicott v. The Office of the Independent Police Review Director, 2014 ONCA 363

The appellant, the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, appealed a Divisional Court order requiring it to produce a comprehensive record of proceedings under the Judicial Review Procedure Act (JRPA) after screening out the respondent's police complaints.

The Court of Appeal held that the Director's decision to screen out a complaint under the Police Services Act is the exercise of a statutory power of decision, as it decides a complainant's legal right to have their complaint pursued.

However, the Court allowed the appeal in part, finding the Divisional Court's order regarding the contents of the record was overly broad, and substituted a narrower requirement for the record of proceedings.

ONCAMay 6, 2014

Respondent Counsel

Katelyn Pinos v. Williams et al., 2014 ONSC 2663

Following a motion in a civil action involving a minor plaintiff, the court determined the appropriate costs award.

Although there had been some division of success on the underlying motion, the court found that the plaintiff had been substantially more successful overall.

Exercising its discretion on costs, the court fixed the amount payable rather than requiring further submissions.

The defendants were ordered to pay the plaintiff costs of the motion in a fixed sum inclusive of disbursements and HST.

SCJMay 1, 2014

Applicant Counsel

Pinos v. Williams et al., 2014 ONSC 2233

The defendants brought a motion under Rule 25(11)(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure to strike several paragraphs of the statement of claim alleging prior misconduct and knowledge of risk relating to an alleged assault against a minor in a hotel room, or alternatively sought particulars under Rule 25.10.

The court held that the plaintiffs were entitled at the pleading stage to make allegations relevant to negligence and vicarious liability, particularly where the defendants would possess the relevant knowledge regarding prior conduct.

The court declined to strike most of the impugned pleadings but found that certain paragraphs were duplicative or improperly framed as submissions rather than allegations.

The court struck limited portions of the pleading while otherwise allowing the claim to proceed.

Applicant Counsel