2 total
The court granted a prescriptive easement for driveway access after finding the respondent's denial of the driveway's existence lacked credibility.
The applicant sought a declaration of a prescriptive easement over the respondent's property for access to a rear parking lot, which was necessary for the rezoning of her mixed-use building to fully residential.
The respondent denied the existence of the driveway and the easement.
The court found that the applicant successfully established the requirements for a prescriptive easement under section 31 of the Real Property Limitations Act, including continuous, open, peaceful, and non-permissive use for the requisite twenty-year period prior to the property's conversion to Land Titles in 1999.
The court explicitly disbelieved the respondent's evidence regarding the driveway's existence.
The application was granted, and the Land Registrar was directed to amend property records to reflect the easement.
Statement of claim struck for pleading deficiencies but leave to amend granted as tenable claims possible.
The defendant former employee moved to strike the plaintiffs' statement of claim without leave to amend.
The plaintiffs, a dentist and his practice, alleged the defendant defamed them and sabotaged their computers during her brief employment.
The court struck the poorly drafted statement of claim but granted the plaintiffs leave to amend, finding that tenable causes of action for defamation, breach of fiduciary duty, and conspiracy were possible on the facts alleged.
The plaintiffs were ordered to pay $9,000 in costs for delivering a deficient pleading.
