Civil Litigation - Plaintiff cases from the Divisional Court
Motions for leave to appeal costs and subsequent order dismissed with costs.
The moving parties brought motions for leave to appeal a costs order and a subsequent order.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motions for leave to appeal and awarded costs of $15,000 to the responding parties.
Motion for leave to seek judicial review of an adjudicator's determination granted.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to seek judicial review of an adjudicator's determination.
The Divisional Court granted the motion for leave and directed the parties to schedule a case management teleconference to establish a schedule and fix the questions for review.
Costs of the leave motion were fixed at $5,000, payable in the discretion of the review panel.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal an order dated November 30, 2023.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs of $2,500 to the responding party.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with costs awarded to the responding parties.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal two previous orders.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs to the responding parties in the amount of $2,237.40.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal the order of Casullo J. dated December 4, 2023.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs of $5,000 to the responding party.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with costs fixed at $1,500.
The moving parties brought a motion for leave to appeal the order of Perell J. dated February 29, 2024.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal and awarded costs to the responding parties in the amount of $1,500.
Small claims appeal dismissed; claim issued within limitation period and extension of service time upheld.
The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court judgment regarding an outstanding credit card debt.
He argued that the respondent improperly obtained an order extending the time for service and that the claim was statute-barred.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the claim was issued within the limitation period and that the order extending time for service was an unappealable interlocutory order.
The court also noted the appellant's failure to attend the peremptory hearing and awarded costs of $10,000 to the respondent.
The moving parties sought leave to appeal an order of the Superior Court of Justice.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal in writing.
Costs were awarded to the responding parties in the amount of $2,191.64.
Stay of sanctions granted to school board trustee pending judicial review of Code of Conduct violations.
The applicant, a school board trustee, brought motions to stay sanctions imposed against her by the respondent school board for violating its Trustee Code of Conduct, pending the hearing of her judicial review applications.
The sanctions included barring her from attending board and committee meetings and a public censure.
The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test and granted the stay, finding that there were serious issues to be tried regarding the board's process and jurisdiction, that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if barred from meetings she could never attend again, and that the balance of convenience favoured the applicant as her application would be largely moot if she served the sanctions before the hearing.
Notice of appeal and judicial review struck; vague order for retrieval of personal property stayed.
The self-represented moving party in an estate administration dispute sought to appeal and judicially review an interlocutory order of a Superior Court judge.
The Divisional Court struck the application for judicial review, noting it lacks jurisdiction to review decisions of a Superior Court judge.
The court also struck the Notice of Appeal, as the underlying order was interlocutory and required leave to appeal.
The court stayed a paragraph of the underlying order that vaguely permitted the responding party to retrieve personal belongings, finding it unenforceable.
The court also clarified that provisions waiving privilege and confidentiality were subject to the rights of non-parties to raise objections.
Unopposed motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal granted due to counsel inadvertence.
The applicant brought an unopposed motion for an extension of time to serve and file a Notice of Appeal from a Small Claims Court decision.
The delay was short, caused by counsel's inadvertence, and the applicant had formed a timely intention to appeal.
Finding no prejudice to the respondent, the court granted the motion and extended the time by 15 days.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed without costs.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal the order of Boswell J. dated January 24, 2024.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal without costs.
The self-represented moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal an October 2023 order.
Appeal transferred to Court of Appeal as aggregate damages exceeded Divisional Court's $50,000 monetary jurisdiction.
The appellant appealed a trial judgment awarding the respondents damages for their arrest at a border crossing.
The Divisional Court raised the issue of its jurisdiction to hear the appeal under s. 19(1.2) of the Courts of Justice Act.
The court found that because the total damages awarded in each action exceeded $50,000 inclusive of prejudgment interest, the appeal exceeded the Divisional Court's monetary jurisdiction.
The appeal was transferred to the Court of Appeal pursuant to s. 110 of the Courts of Justice Act.
The moving parties, RBC Insurance Agency Ltd. and Aviva General Insurance Company, brought a motion for leave to appeal the order of Glustein J. dated March 2, 2023.
Motion to set aside order denying stay of motor vehicle dealer registration revocation dismissed.
The appellants, a motor vehicle dealer and its principal, appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision revoking their registrations for breaching conditions and ungovernability.
A single judge of the Divisional Court dismissed their motion for a stay pending appeal.
The appellants brought a motion under s. 21(5) of the Courts of Justice Act to set aside that order.
The Divisional Court panel dismissed the motion, finding no error of law or palpable and overriding error of fact in the motion judge's application of the RJR-MacDonald test for a stay.
Motion to strike affidavit portions dismissed without prejudice; responding party granted leave to amend.
The moving party brought a motion to strike portions of an affidavit tendered by the responding party in support of its motion for leave to appeal an adjudicator's decision.
The court noted that the typical practice is to have motions to strike heard at the same time as the primary motion.
The court dismissed the motion without prejudice, granted the responding party leave to amend its affidavit, and set a revised timetable for the leave motion, leaving any remaining disputes about the affidavit's content to the leave panel.
Interlocutory injunction to stay enforcement of tow truck certificate requirements pending Charter challenge denied.
The applicant, a tow truck driver subject to a mandatory lifetime weapons prohibition, was denied a tow certificate and a tow driver certificate under the Towing and Storage Safety and Enforcement Act, 2021.
He brought a motion for an interlocutory injunction to prevent the enforcement of the certificate requirements against him pending his application for judicial review and a Charter challenge.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion, finding that while there was a serious issue to be tried and the applicant would suffer irreparable harm, the balance of convenience favoured the respondent due to the strong public interest in enforcing legislation designed to protect public safety in the towing industry.
Appeal of order granting leave for derivative action dismissed as motions judge made no palpable and overriding errors.
The appellants appealed a decision granting the respondent leave to bring a derivative action.
The appellants argued the motions judge applied the wrong burden of proof regarding good faith, erred in finding the action was in the corporation's best interest, and failed to consider whether an oppression remedy was more appropriate.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the motions judge's factual findings on good faith and the corporation's best interests.
The court also declined to consider the oppression remedy argument as it was not raised before the motions judge.
Motion to vary order dismissed; no costs awarded on motion for leave to appeal.
The moving parties brought a motion to vary an order dated August 25, 2023, and sought costs on a motion for leave to appeal.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion to vary the order and determined that no costs should be awarded on the motion for leave to appeal.
Page 67
