CITATION: Kimvar Enterprises Inc. v. Nextnine Limited, 2010 ONCA 792
DATE: 20101119
DOCKET: C51410
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Doherty, Watt and Epstein JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Kimvar Enterprises Inc.
Applicant (Respondent in Appeal)
and
Nextnine Limited
Respondent (Appellant)
AND BETWEEN
C51411
Nextnine Limited
Applicant (Appellant)
and
Kimvar Enterprises Inc.
Respondent (Respondent in Appeal)
Jonathan F. Lancaster and Vaso Maric, for the appellant
Michael Miller and Michael Arbutina, for the respondent
Heard: November 18, 2010
On appeal from the judgment of Justice Gilmore of the Superior Court of Justice, dated November 12, 2009.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1] We appreciate the able submissions of counsel for the appellant. However, we see no error in the application judge’s holding that the Quit Claim deed was clear, unambiguous and determinative (paras. 69-80). We do not agree that the meaning of the Quit Claim could be determined only by reference to other documents referable to the property and the right of way.
[2] The judge’s conclusion in the meaning and effect of the Quit Claim deed, with which we agree, renders it unnecessary to address the other ground of appeal.
[3] The appeal is dismissed.
[4] The appellant applies for leave to appeal the costs order. The costs are substantial. However, the application judge gave careful and detailed reasons for her award. We see no basis to grant leave to appeal. Leave to appeal is dismissed.
[5] Costs of the appeal to the respondent fixed at $30,000, inclusive of disbursements and all applicable taxes.