Tamur Shah

The moving parties (defendants/plaintiffs by counterclaim) sought a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) for two investment properties, alleging fraud by the responding parties.

The responding party opposed, raising issues with the evidentiary basis of the motion.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that while the moving parties established a triable claim to an interest in the properties, the equities did not favour granting a CPL.

The properties were acquired as investments, not for unique use, and damages would be a satisfactory remedy, as a CPL is not intended to secure a claim for damages.

The court also commented on the inappropriate use of inflammatory language in affidavits.

Stewart Title Guaranty Company brought a motion for partial summary judgment to dismiss the claim of its policyholder, Farina Nazir, and the crossclaim of 2212478 Ontario Inc. The court dismissed the motion, finding that the issues raised could not be readily bifurcated from the main action and presented a serious prospect of inconsistent findings of fact and mixed fact and law.

The judge determined that a just adjudication required a complete understanding of the allegedly fraudulent transactions, which had not yet been fully discovered.

The court emphasized that partial summary judgment is a rare procedure, reserved for the clearest of cases, and was not appropriate here due to the risks of delay, expense, inefficiency, and inconsistent findings.

The action was ordered to proceed to trial expeditiously.