Milena Protich

The appellant appealed an order dismissing her action for adverse possession and compelling her attendance at a judgment debtor examination.

The motion judge dismissed the action despite the respondent not requesting that relief at the hearing and without giving the appellant notice.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the dismissal of the action due to procedural unfairness, but upheld the order compelling the appellant's attendance at the judgment debtor examination.

A non-lawyer, Stuart Murray, sought leave to represent the plaintiff corporation, Cowal Chalmers Inc., in this action.

The defendant opposed the motion, citing Murray's disbarment and alleged inability to represent the corporation effectively.

The court, applying Rule 15.01(2) factors, granted leave, finding that as the sole shareholder, officer, and director, Murray was intricately connected to the corporation and reasonably capable of representation.

The court also found the corporation was financially unable to retain counsel, emphasizing access to justice.

Arguments regarding Murray's disbarment and a potential conflict of interest due to a third-party claim against him were considered and dismissed as not precluding his representation.

The appellant, a claimant under the Walkerton Compensation Plan, appealed an arbitration decision awarding him $11,000 for economic losses related to the Walkerton E. coli water contamination.

The appellant argued he was denied procedural fairness due to inadequate accommodation for his post-stroke limitations, ineffective assistance of counsel, and adjudicative bias.

He also challenged the arbitrator's credibility assessments and factual findings.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding that the arbitrators had fulfilled their duty to accommodate, there was no reasonable apprehension of bias, and the arbitrator's factual findings were reasonable and free of palpable and overriding error.

A class member in the Walkerton water contamination class action brought a preliminary motion ahead of his intended appeal of an arbitrator's decision regarding his compensation claim.

The claimant sought various forms of relief, including the bifurcation of his appeal to first address issues of fairness and accommodation, a court-ordered neuropsychological assessment, the appointment of a disability law firm to represent him, and an advance payment of $40,000.

The court dismissed all of the claimant's requests, finding no basis to bifurcate the appeal, no jurisdiction or necessity to order the assessment or appoint counsel, and no evidence to support an advance costs award.

The Administrator of the Walkerton Compensation Plan brought a motion to appoint a new arbitrator to complete a claimant's hearing after the original arbitrator died before rendering a decision.

The claimant opposed the appointment, alleging a reasonable apprehension of bias because the proposed arbitrator was the deceased arbitrator's former law partner, and sought a hearing de novo.

The court dismissed the bias claim, appointed the proposed arbitrator, and ordered the rehearing to proceed based on the existing transcripts, by analogy to the Courts of Justice Act.

The court also awarded the claimant $15,000 in interim legal fees due to the extraordinary circumstances.