DATE: 20050216

DOCKET: C40589

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

ROSHAN KALLA (Petitioner/Respondent in Appeal)

-and- NURDIN KALLA (Respondent/Appellant)

BEFORE:

LABROSSE, LANG and JURIANSZ JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

Nurdin Kalla

the appellant

in person

Richard N. Brown

for the respondent

HEARD AND RELEASED ORALLY:

February 14, 2005

On appeal from the judgment of Justice Nancy L. Backhouse of the Superior Court of Justice dated May 5, 2003.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] At the outset, Mr. Kalla brought a motion for the admission of fresh evidence. There is no reason why the proposed evidence was not adduced or was not available at trial. Even applying the test flexibly in a family law setting, the fresh evidence does not meet the test for admissibility.

[2] Mr. Kalla in his oral argument raises many complaints and accusations that do not assist in the resolution of this appeal.

[3] The trial took place in difficult circumstances because Mr. Kalla was representing himself. The trial judge exercised her trial management power to curtail irrelevant cross-examination and keep the trial moving ahead in a timely fashion.

[4] The trial judge made specific findings with respect to the valuation date, the husband’s pension, the matrimonial home, the division of net family property and child support.

[5] The complaints of Mr. Kalla do not provide a proper basis for this court to interfere with the trial judgment.

[6] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs fixed in the amount of $2,000, all inclusive.

Signed: “J.-M. Labrosse J.A.” “S.E. Lang J.A.” “R.G. Juriansz J.A.”