Citation: Lou v. Toronto (City), 2017 ONSC 2992

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 204/17
DATE: 20170515

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT

BETWEEN:

AMIN HADJ LOU
Plaintiff/Respondent

– and –

THE CITY OF TORONTO
Defendant/Moving Party

Amin Hadj Lou, acting in person
Jared Wehrle, for the Defendant/Moving Party

HEARD at Toronto: May 15, 2017

Oral Reasons for Judgment

Corbett J. (Orally)

[1] Toronto seeks an order extending the time to appeal an order of Deputy Judge De Lucia dismissing a motion for summary judgment. Toronto satisfies all aspect of the test for an extension except for one: the appeal is patently without merit. The impugned decision is clearly interlocutory. It does not finally dispose of any issue in the case and is not binding on the trial judge (including any findings made about the extent of privilege and any “immunity” the City may have. There are no appeals from interlocutory decisions of the Small Claims Court. This prohibition is absolute. The motion is dismissed. Nominal costs to the respondent fixed at $100 inclusive payable within 30 days by the City.

Corbett J.

Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 15, 2017
Date of Release: May 15, 2017

CITATION: Lou v. Toronto (City), 2017 ONSC 2992
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 204/17
DATE: 20170515

ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT

BETWEEN:

AMIN HADJ LOU
Plaintiff/Respondent

– and –

THE CITY OF TORONTO
Defendant/Moving Party

ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Corbett J.

Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 15, 2017
Date of Release: May 15, 2017