Mackenzie Laforet

The plaintiffs, two long-standing members of a scouting organization, brought defamation actions against the defendant, a former director who was removed from his position.

Following his removal, the defendant engaged in a campaign of sending emails and a formal complaint to third parties, falsely accusing the plaintiffs of illegal conduct, bullying, and failing to investigate child abuse.

The court found the statements were defamatory and rejected the defences of justification, qualified privilege, and fair comment, noting the defendant was motivated by malice and a desire for retribution.

The court awarded $35,000 in damages to one plaintiff and $20,000 to the other.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his motion to set aside a default judgment obtained by the respondent credit card company for unpaid charges.

The motion judge applied the Mountain View factors and found that all but one weighed against the appellant, including a lengthy unexplained delay in bringing the motion and a lack of plausible excuse for the default.

While the motion judge accepted the appellant's proposed defence had an air of reality, she found it weak and insufficient to overcome the other factors.

The Court of Appeal found no basis for appellate interference, holding the motion judge properly exercised her discretion in weighing the factors holistically.

This standalone costs decision followed reasons continuing an interim injunction and certificate of pending litigation until trial.

The successful moving parties sought partial indemnity costs and disbursements, while the responding parties argued costs should be in the cause or reduced.

Applying the ordinary rule that costs follow the result and the discretion applicable to interlocutory injunction proceedings, the court fixed costs itself rather than reserving all costs to trial.

The court found the moving parties were largely successful and awarded reduced partial indemnity costs plus limited disbursements, while reserving transcript-cost issues to the trial judge.

The plaintiff, John Shane, sought damages from Ontario Aboriginal Housing Support Services Corporation (OAHS) for property damage caused by a fire in a rental unit leased to OAHS clients.

Shane claimed OAHS had orally agreed to cover all property damage caused by its clients, or, in the alternative, that OAHS was negligent in supporting the tenants.

The court found no oral contract existed, as there was no meeting of the minds or clear promise by OAHS to cover all damages.

The court also found no evidence of negligence by OAHS.

The claim was dismissed.

The Registrar of Motor Vehicles cancelled the Appellant's Commercial Vehicle Operator's Registration (CVOR) certificate, alleging the Appellant was related to two other companies whose CVORs were previously cancelled for poor safety records.

The Appellant appealed the cancellation.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the Appellant was indeed related to and controlled by the former CVOR holders, based on unorthodox financial arrangements, shared services, and common management activities.

However, given the Appellant's acceptable safety record during its brief period of operation, the Tribunal varied the Registrar's order, imposing strict conditions on the Appellant's CVOR rather than outright cancellation.