DATE: 20010704 DOCKET: C35337
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
MICHAEL ARISTOCRAT (Appellant) v. RIMA ARISTOCRAT, LALI ARISTOCRAT, THE WILLIS BUSINESS COLLEGE LIMITED operated as WILLIS COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY (Respondents)
BEFORE:
LABROSSE, ABELLA and MacPHERSON JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Michael Aristocrat,
acting on his own behalf
Todd J. Burke and Phuong Ngo,
for the respondents
HEARD:
July 3, 2001
RELEASED ORALLY:
July 3, 2001
On appeal from the judgment of Justice Monique Métivier dated November 3, 2000
E N D O R S E M E N T
[1] This is an appeal from the decision of Métivier J. dismissing the appellant's motion for summary judgment and granting the respondents' cross-motion for summary judgment, dismissing the action.
[2] The essence of this action is that the appellant's former wife, Rima, and his daughter, Lali, illegally wrestled from him a company that he had purchased. On September 29, 1989, the common shares of Willis Business College were transferred to the appellant, in trust. On the same day, the shares were transferred to Lali from the appellant who, as trustee, held them beneficially for her. On September 29, 1989, the appellant was appointed President and Secretary of the company. On October 3, 1989, Rima and Lali were appointed directors and the appellant resigned as director, President and Secretary. There is also a trust declaration dated October 3, 1989 declaring that the appellant purchased all of the shares of the company in trust for Lali. On November 1, 1993, Lali resigned as President and Secretary and on the same day she transferred all her shares in the company to Rima, who was appointed sole director, President and Secretary of the company.
[3] In 1991, the appellant declared bankruptcy. In his Statement of Affairs, signed under oath, he declared he had no assets. He disavowed owning any shares and none were disclosed as part of his estate at the time of his bankruptcy.
[4] The appellant made assertions that certain documents were forgeries. There is no evidence to substantiate these allegations. The appellant provided no evidence to establish that any of his property was unlawfully taken from him.
[5] The motions judge noted that it was not always easy to glean the points that were being made by the appellant. The appellant's factum and submissions suffer from the same defect. The motions judge was unable to find that there was any credibility issue sufficient to require a trial. In the absence of any supporting evidence for his numerous assertions, the motions judge was correct in dismissing the applicant's motion for summary judgment and dismissing his action against the respondents.
[6] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs fixed at $4,000.
(signed) "J. M. Labrosse J.A."
(signed) "R. S. Abella J.A."
(signed) "J. C. MacPherson J.A."