DATE: 20060817

DOCKET: C43968

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

EDMUND LALLMAN (ALSO KNOW AS EDMUND LALMAN) ESTATE TRUSTEE FOR THE ESTATE OF SAMUEL LALMAN (Plaintiffs/Respondents) – and – JOSEPH LALLMAN (AKA JOSEPH LALLMAN) and GERALD LALMAN and ROSALINE LALMAN (Defendants/Appellant)

AND RE:

JERALD LALLMAN AND EDMUND LALLMAN (ALSO KNOW AS EDMUND LALMAN) ESTATE TRUSTEE FOR THE ESTATE OF SAMUEL LALMAN (Applicants/Respondents) – and – JOSEPH LALLMAN and GAIL LALLMAN ALSO KNOWN AS ANN GAIL SILOCHNI NARINE (Respondents/Appellants)

BEFORE:

BORINS, JURIANSZ and LAFORME JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Joseph Lallman, in person

for the appellants

Ronald R. Taylor

for the respondents

HEARD & ENDORSED:

August 14, 2006

On appeal from the judgment of Justice William P. Somers of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 13, 2005.

A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] The appellant relies on five grounds of appeal all of which in our view are without merit. The only issue at trial was the ownership of the property. The trial judge considered the appellant’s position, which was largely based on his evidence which the trial judge rejected. We are not persuaded that the trial judge erred in finding that the property was owned by the Estate of Samuel Lallman. The trial judge did not err in admitting the examination for discovery of Samuel Lallman.

[2] The relief granted against Ann Gail Lallman was supported on the evidence, so that it is irrelevant that she was not a party to both proceedings. We have not been persuaded that there is any merit in respect to the appellant’s defence of laches.

[3] Therefore, the appeal is dismissed with costs, fixed in the amount of $20,000 inclusive of disbursements and GST payable by Joseph Lallman. The costs are those of the appeal and the motion to stay the trial judgement.