Who is Martin Henderson?

Martin Henderson is an Ontario lawyer with 4 court cases on record from 2014 to 2022.

What courts has Martin Henderson appeared in?

Martin Henderson has appeared in Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Martin Henderson handled?

Martin Henderson has 4 cases on record from 2014 to 2022.

What judges has Martin Henderson appeared before?

Martin Henderson has most frequently appeared before Justice Graeme Mew, Justice Ruth E. Mesbur, Justice S.T. Bale.

Martin Henderson

4 total

Hiawatha First Nation v. Shearer, 2022 ONSC 3276

Hiawatha First Nation applied for a permanent injunction to restrain three of its members from constructing a gas station on the reserve.

The band argued the construction violated the Indian Act, a band by-law requiring building permits, a band resolution imposing a moratorium on new businesses, and environmental legislation.

The court found that the building permit by-law and environmental legislation did not apply, and that the proposed business structure did not violate the Indian Act.

However, the court held that the band resolution imposing a moratorium was an enforceable by-law.

The court granted an injunction restraining construction while the moratorium remains in effect and until the proponents comply with all applicable laws.

SCJMay 31, 2022

Respondent Counsel

Density Group Limited v. HK Hotels LLC, 2015 ONSC 7717

The plaintiff moved to amend its statement of claim to add two corporate defendants and assert a fraudulent conveyance claim relating to rights under a letter of intent associated with a hotel development project.

The defendant opposed the amendment on the basis of res judicata, issue estoppel, limitation periods, and abuse of process, and also sought security for costs against the plaintiff corporation.

The court held that the proposed claim was not finally adjudicated in earlier summary judgment proceedings and that the new pleading asserted a different theory based on joint venture ownership and fraudulent conveyance.

The court also rejected the limitation defence, finding the amendment motion was effectively commenced within the limitation period.

The defendant failed to demonstrate that the plaintiff corporation was impecunious or that the action was frivolous and vexatious.

SCJDec 9, 2015

Respondent Counsel

Fram Elgin Mills 90 Inc. v. Romandale Farms Limited et al, 2015 ONSC 7308

The defendant, Romandale Farms Limited, brought a motion for leave to amend its statement of defence, add third parties, consolidate actions, and dissolve a 2007 interlocutory injunction in a complex commercial real estate dispute.

The plaintiff opposed the amendments, arguing prejudice, res judicata, and withdrawal of an admission.

The court granted leave to amend, finding no non-compensable prejudice and that the proposed defences were tenable and responsive to the plaintiff's amended claims regarding a partial settlement agreement.

The court also joined one third party for limited purposes to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and dissolved the 2007 injunction, as the plaintiff no longer claimed a proprietary interest in the land.

SCJNov 24, 2015

Respondent Counsel

Mandel v. Morguard Corporation, 2014 ONSC 1540

A residential tenant sought an interlocutory injunction preventing the landlord from allocating units in a redeveloped apartment building until alleged breaches of agreements and Ontario Municipal Board decisions were resolved.

The moving party argued that the relocation and unit selection process violated a section 37 Planning Act agreement and prior representations, and would cause irreparable harm.

The court applied the test from RJR MacDonald v Canada (AG) and held that the tenant failed to establish irreparable harm and that the balance of convenience favoured the landlord.

The tenant also failed to provide an undertaking as to damages as required by Rule 40.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The motion for injunctive relief was dismissed and costs were awarded to the landlord.

SCJMar 10, 2014