2 total
The Court of Appeal upheld a foreign talaq divorce, barring spousal support and equalization claims.
The appellant, Farzana Ratan Sonia, appealed a motion judge's order recognizing a Bangladesh talaq divorce and setting aside prior consent orders.
The recognition of the foreign divorce precluded her claims for spousal support and equalization of net family property in Ontario due to limitation periods and the interpretation of the Family Law Act.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the Bangladesh divorce, governed by the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961, was not a "bare" talaq divorce and satisfied Canadian requirements for recognition due to state oversight and notice provisions.
The court also upheld the setting aside of consent orders due to the appellant's misrepresentation about her subsequent marriage.
The court allowed the plaintiff to increase her damages claim but rejected other amendments for improperly pleading evidence instead of material facts.
The plaintiff, Sharna Gayle, brought a motion to amend her Amended Statement of Claim in a solicitor's negligence action against Lerners LLP and its lawyers.
The proposed amendments sought to increase the damages claimed from $1,000,000 to $20,000,000 and to add extensive particulars detailing the alleged negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, including allegations of conflict of interest due to "religious and personal affiliations." The court granted the amendment to increase the damages, affirming that such an increase does not constitute prejudice.
However, the court dismissed the motion to add the detailed particulars, finding that these proposed amendments violated Rule 25.06(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure by pleading evidence, explanations, and submissions rather than concise material facts.
The court also found that the proposed amendments did not introduce a new cause of action and that the delay in seeking amendments was not excessive enough to presume non-compensable prejudice.
