N. Amiri

On a family law motion arising from a simple divorce application, the moving party sought leave to file an Answer late, along with related procedural and preservation relief.

The court refused to reopen the divorce application, holding that the deadline to file an Answer is not merely a guideline and that the circumstances were materially distinguishable from authorities favouring extensions of time.

The court emphasized the limited nature of the original application, the passage of more than two years since commencement, the absence of meaningful concessions, and the availability of other avenues to pursue property claims.

The certificate of pending litigation and preservation relief were maintained, and the prior service order was varied to remove the requirement of service by mail on the added party in Tehran.

The young person applicant, charged with first degree murder alongside three co-accused, applied for a directed verdict on the basis of insufficient evidence.

The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence, including text messages, video surveillance, and the applicant's flight from the scene, to establish the applicant's participation in a planned and deliberate murder.

The court dismissed the application, finding that there was sufficient evidence upon which a properly instructed jury, acting reasonably, could return a verdict of guilty.

Four young persons were charged with the first-degree murder of a sixteen-year-old victim who was shot and killed in a residential building staircase.

The Crown alleged that the accused lured the victim into the staircase as part of a planned and deliberate execution, relying heavily on surveillance video and extensive text message evidence containing gang slang.

The court found three of the accused guilty as joint principals or aiders, concluding they orchestrated and executed the plan.

The fourth accused was found not guilty, as the evidence raised suspicions but failed to prove his involvement beyond a reasonable doubt.