Nadim Barsoum

The plaintiff sued the defendant under the Dog Owners' Liability Act after being bitten by a dog in a park.

The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff could not accurately identify the dog or the owner based on physical descriptions.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the plaintiff's evidence of continuously observing the dog until the defendant leashed it created a genuine issue of credibility that could not be resolved on a summary judgment motion.

The court directed the matter to proceed to a summary trial under Rule 76.

Following a family law trial where the applicant was substantially successful on the issue of spousal support, the court determined the issue of costs.

The court noted that the respondent's failure to fully disclose her financial situation in a timely manner unnecessarily increased the length and complexity of the litigation.

The applicant was awarded $30,000 in costs on a partial indemnity basis, to be deducted from the amount he owed for the equalization of net family property.

This trial decision addresses outstanding issues in a divorce proceeding, including the respondent's annual income for support, spousal support entitlement and quantum, retroactivity of support, and special child expenses.

The court imputed income to the respondent due to inadequate disclosure and unreasonable business expense deductions, averaging her income over four years.

The applicant was awarded indefinite spousal support on both compensatory and non-compensatory grounds, recognizing his economic disadvantage and contributions to the respondent's career.

Child and spousal support were made retroactive, with arrears offset against the equalization payment.

Special expenses for the child were to be shared proportionately.