MacLeod-Beliveau

The plaintiff brought an action in negligence against his former teacher and the school board for childhood sexual abuse.

The school board admitted liability in negligence for failing to monitor the teacher, and the trial proceeded as a contested assessment of damages.

The court found that the sexual abuse was a major cause of the plaintiff's severe psychiatric injuries, including major depression with dysthymia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and personality disorders.

The court rejected the school board's argument that the 'crumbling skull' principle should reduce damages by 50%, finding no measurable risk that the plaintiff's pre-existing learning disability would have caused his mental disorders.

The court awarded $250,000 in general and aggravated damages, $1,955,000 for past and future income loss, $135,587 for future loss of interdependent relationship, and other special damages, for a total of $2,413,442.11.

Following a successful motion for summary judgment by the plaintiff landlord in a commercial lease dispute, the court determined the quantum and scale of costs.

The lease contained an indemnification clause providing for solicitor and client costs.

Applying the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court awarded costs on a substantial indemnity basis, reducing the claimed amount slightly for proportionality, resulting in a total costs award of $59,851.36.

The plaintiff brought a motion to amend a registrar's Order to Continue to add the deceased's spouse in her personal capacity as a Family Law Act claimant, correcting an accidental omission.

The defendants opposed, arguing the limitation period had expired.

The court applied Rule 37.14 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and granted the amendment nunc pro tunc, finding the delay was reasonably explained, the omission was inadvertent, the plaintiff moved promptly upon discovery, and there was no actual prejudice to the defendants.

The parties sought clarification of a previous order regarding the conditions of the plaintiff's independent medical examinations.

The court issued supplementary reasons clarifying that the prohibition on using a questionnaire in advance of the assessment does not preclude the use of psychometric testing forms.

Furthermore, the condition that the plaintiff's health records not be disclosed to anyone other than defence counsel does not prevent the expert from utilizing administrative staff or a psychometrist.

The moving party (former husband) brought a motion to change a final order to terminate his spousal support obligations, alleging a material change in circumstances due to a decline in his business income and the responding party's increased income.

The responding party opposed the motion and sought enforcement of over $134,000 in support arrears, as well as security for future support against the moving party's property on a First Nations reserve.

The court dismissed the motion to change, finding the moving party deliberately hid his income, failed to provide adequate financial disclosure, and had the means to pay.

The court imputed his income and found no material change in circumstances.

Furthermore, the court granted the responding party's request for security for future spousal support in the amount of $400,000, ordering a charge against the moving party's Certificates of Possession under the Indian Act, subject to approval by the Band and the Minister.

The plaintiffs' insurer brought a subrogated action against the defendant, the plaintiffs' son, after his negligence in repairing his vehicle caused a fire that destroyed the plaintiffs' garage.

The defendant was an unnamed insured under the plaintiffs' homeowner's policy.

The court found that the defendant was negligent in his use of a battery charger, which caused the fire.

However, the subrogated claim was dismissed because an insurer cannot subrogate against its own insured for losses paid out under the same policy.

The plaintiffs were awarded $8,000 for their uninsured losses.