Meghan E.W. O’Halloran

The appellant appealed two orders concerning a default judgment for amounts owed on a professional student line of credit and a credit card.

The appellant had failed to file a defence, was noted in default, and default judgment was granted.

Her subsequent motions to set aside the default judgment were dismissed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the motion judges that the motion to set aside was not brought in time, lacked a plausible excuse for the default, and presented no arguable defence on the merits.

The appellant's argument that repayment was only required upon her call to the bar was rejected as contrary to the written agreement.

The defendant brought a motion to appeal an order of a single judge of the Superior Court of Justice, which had dismissed her motion to set aside a default judgment regarding student loan and credit card debt.

The court dismissed the motion, finding it had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a final order of a single judge of the same court.

Costs of $1,000 were awarded to the responding bank.

The applicant sought court assistance to compel financial disclosure from corporations associated with the respondent within the context of a family law arbitration.

The arbitrator had previously ordered disclosure but concluded the respondent had not fully complied and lacked jurisdiction to compel production from non-party corporations.

The court ordered the respondents to produce the information listed in an exhibit and required the applicant to execute a confidentiality agreement covering all disclosed materials.

The court upheld the arbitrator’s direction that the respondent bear the costs of locating and compiling disclosure while the applicant would pay photocopying at the Legal Aid rate.

The applicant was found substantially successful and awarded partial costs of the motion.

The plaintiff bank brought a motion for summary judgment to recover a credit card debt of $46,033.24 together with contractual interest.

The defendants had filed a statement of defence asserting lack of knowledge of the claim and referring to personal financial hardship but filed no responding affidavit materials and did not attend the motion.

Applying the summary judgment framework and the “full appreciation test” articulated in Combined Air, the court held that the record disclosed no genuine issue requiring a trial.

The defence consisted only of bald assertions unsupported by evidence.

Summary judgment was granted in favour of the bank together with contractual interest and costs.