ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
CARNWATH, SWINTON AND NORDHEIMER JJ.
B E T W E E N:
ARTHUR DUNCAN GREEN
Petitioner/Husband
(Respondent in Appeal)
- and -
SUZANNA DOBSON GREEN
Respondent/Wife
Edwin A. Flak and Leonardo Mongillo, Petitioner/Husband
No One Appearing
Erik Penz, for the Respondent/Appellant Kenora Prospectors & Miners Limited
Suzen Associated Holding Limited, No One Appearing
HEARD at Toronto: August 19, 2008
NORDHEIMER J.: (Orally)
1KPM appeals, with leave granted, from the order of Backhouse J., wherein she denied KPM leave to bring a motion to remove themselves as a party to this proceeding.
2KPM contends that Backhouse J. made this order summarily and without providing them with the opportunity to be heard.
3This has been a long-standing family dispute between Mr. and Mrs. Green, dating back to 1993. The history of the proceeding led Backhouse J. to make an order in 2007, that no one could bring a motion without her leave. Contrary to the appellant’s characterization, this is not an “extraordinary” order. It is unfortunately an altogether too frequent and necessary order because of the manner in which some parties choose to litigate their disputes. It was also an order that was entirely within the jurisdiction of Backhouse J. to make in her role as the case management judge for this proceeding.
4Prior to these events, in 2005, KPM was made a party to these proceedings by Backhouse J. in order to facilitate the valuation of certain properties over which it has control.
5Mrs. Green is said to control KPM. Whether that is so, it seems relatively clear that Mrs. Green has an interest in the properties controlled by KPM. KPM did not appeal that order. KPM now contends that the reason for adding them as a party has been satisfied and their participation is no longer justified.
6It is apparent from the material before us that that contention is very much in dispute. Mr. Green says that certain lands have not as yet been valued and in any event, further disclosure and witnesses are necessary from KPM for the purposes of the trial, both in terms of any valuations done and also to the issue of the degree of Mrs. Green’s interest in KPM. I would note that the trial of this matter is scheduled for October 27, 2008.
7It is fair to assume, given the history of this matter, that Backhouse J. was entirely familiar with the reasons that led her to add KPM as a party and also the events that have transpired since that time. She was entitled in furtherance of her efforts to manage this case to the impending trial date to deal with requests such as the one that was raised by KPM in an expedient fashion. It is apparent from her decision that the reasons that led her to add KPM originally as a party were, in her view, still extant. We see no reason to interfere with that conclusion.
8The appeal is therefore dismissed.
CARNWATH J.
9Counsel, I have endorsed the back of the record, “The motion for adjournment is dismissed. On consent, the two disputed affidavits were placed before the Court. The appeal is dismissed for oral reasons given in Court by Nordheimer J. Costs to the respondent payable by KPM fixed at $8,500.00, inclusive of fees, disbursements and GST, partial indemnity payable 30 days.”
NORDHEIMER J.
CARNWATH J.
SWINTON J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: August 19, 2008
Date of Release: August 21, 2008
COURT FILE NO.: 110/08
DATE: 20080819
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
CARNWATH, SWINTON AND NORDHEIMER JJ.
B E T W E E N:
ARTHUR DUNCAN GREEN
Petitioner/Husband
(Respondent in Appeal)
- and -
SUZANNA DOBSON GREEN
Respondent/Wife
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
NORDHEIMER J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: August 19, 2008
Date of Release: August 21, 2008