Murray Miskin

The court considered whether the applicant, Gerry Tyndall, had a life interest in the property where he resided with the deceased, Gail Hill, pursuant to her will.

The court found that Mr. Tyndall had a life interest in the property, including the right of exclusive possession, subject to his responsibility for day-to-day expenses, while the estate was responsible for taxes, insurance, and capital improvements.

The decision also addressed the right to collect rent and the removal of other occupants.

The applicant condominium corporation brought a motion to evict the respondent unit owner and force the sale of his unit, alleging he breached a prior Compliance Order and the Condominium Act, 1998.

The applicant relied on evidence from its security manager regarding the respondent's verbal altercations with staff and social media posts.

The court found the applicant's evidence to be largely inadmissible hearsay and highly prejudicial.

While the respondent's behaviour was rude and obnoxious, it did not constitute a breach of the Act or contempt of the Compliance Order.

The motion was dismissed without costs, subject to terms including the respondent's undertaking to vacate the unit until December 2025 and rent it out.

The plaintiff, CIBC Mortgages Inc., brought a motion for summary judgment against the defendant, Lyle Derlago, seeking payment for amounts owing under a mortgage for which the defendant acted as guarantor.

The defendant argued that genuine issues requiring a trial existed, specifically concerning the plaintiff's alleged negligence in securing and selling the mortgaged property after default, which he claimed reduced its value.

The court found that the defendant's contractual obligation as guarantor was enforceable independently of the plaintiff's actions regarding the property sale.

The court held that the alleged negligence and improvident sale claims were premature as the property had not yet been sold, and such claims could be pursued later.

Consequently, the motion for summary judgment was granted in favour of the plaintiff.

The appellant brought an action in Ontario for injuries sustained in a slip and fall on a cruise ship owned by the respondent.

The respondent successfully moved to stay the action based on a forum selection clause in the cruise contract.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, finding that the appellant was bound by the contract and failed to show strong cause why the forum selection clause should not be enforced.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits for 156 weeks.

The insurer terminated weekly and child care benefits on the basis that the applicant did not meet the stricter post-156 week eligibility test.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's primary debilitating condition, carpal tunnel syndrome, was unrelated to the accident.

The arbitrator concluded that the applicant's accident-related injuries did not continuously prevent her from engaging in substantially all of her normal activities.

The claims for ongoing weekly benefits, child care benefits, and supplementary medical and rehabilitation benefits were dismissed, though the applicant was awarded her arbitration expenses.