3 total
Motion for leave to intervene granted to community group in dispute over summer camp governance.
The proposed intervenor, Friends of Shalom (FOS), brought a motion for leave to intervene as an added party in an action concerning the governance and charitable property of the Toronto Zionist Council (TZC) and its operation of Camp Shalom.
The plaintiffs consented to the motion, but TZC opposed it.
The court found that FOS satisfied the criteria under Rule 13.01, as it had an interest in the subject matter, could be adversely affected by a judgment, and shared common questions of law and fact with the parties.
The court granted FOS leave to intervene on specific terms to ensure its participation would be useful and not unduly delay or prejudice the proceedings.
The court dismissed an application to quash a municipal by-law repealing an accommodation tax, finding no debt or bad faith.
The applicant sought to quash a municipal by-law establishing a new municipal accommodation tax on the grounds that it violated the Municipal Act by attempting to repeal a by-law under which a debt had been contracted, and that it was passed in bad faith to vitiate a valid and subsisting agreement.
The court found that the revenue sharing arrangement under the transient accommodation tax did not constitute a debt under the Municipal Act, and that the municipality had not acted in bad faith in passing the new by-law.
The court dismissed the application, finding that the municipality retained the power to enter into agreements with eligible tourism entities and that no exclusivity was granted to the applicant.
Small Claims Court appeal dismissed; no evidence of judicial bias or palpable and overriding error.
The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court decision dismissing her claim against the respondent brokerage for losses incurred during an online stock trade.
The appellant alleged the trial judge was biased against her as a self-represented litigant and made errors of fact and law.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence of bias, particularly as the appellant failed to provide a trial transcript.
The court also held that the trial judge made no palpable and overriding error in concluding the respondent was not liable for the appellant's failure to understand the trading platform or mitigate her losses.
