Michelle Brodey

The appellant appealed the dismissal of two actions brought against the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and various doctors performing review functions.

The motion judge had dismissed the actions based on the confidentiality and immunity from suit provisions in the Regulated Health Professions Act, as well as the doctrine of res judicata.

The Court of Appeal found no merit in the appeal, upheld the motion judge's analysis, and dismissed the appeal with costs fixed at $5,000.

The appellant surety appealed a trial judgment enforcing a customs bond in favour of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA).

The appellant argued the CCRA failed to produce relevant documentation to substantiate the claim.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that section 107 of the Customs Act precluded the CCRA from disclosing importer names to the surety, and that the production of summaries and a dishonoured cheque satisfied the bond's disclosure requirements.

The court varied the judgment only to correct the principal amount upon which interest was calculated.

The appellant appealed an order determining two questions of law on a Rule 21 motion before trial.

The underlying action involved a claim for $10,000,000 in damages for a failed roof at Terminal 3 of Pearson International Airport.

The respondents sought to determine whether a $250,000 limitation of liability clause in the architect's contract affected their claims for contribution and indemnity under the Negligence Act.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the legal issues were novel, complex, and required a full factual record, making them inappropriate for determination on a Rule 21 motion.

The appellant appealed a Rule 21 motion decision that determined complex legal questions regarding contribution and indemnity under section 1 of the Negligence Act in the context of a contractual limitation of liability.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the motions judge's order, finding that the novel and complex legal issues required a full factual record and should not have been determined before trial.