COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: Gacanin v. Macedo, 2012 ONCA 246

DATE: 20120417

DOCKET: C54276

Before: Laskin, Goudge and Rouleau JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Vera Gacanin

Applicant (Appellant)

and

David Macedo

Respondent (Respondent)

Counsel:

Evelyn Kohn Rayson and Eli Antel, for the appellant

Kristy Maurina, for the respondent

Milton A. Davis and Robert MacDonald, for Be There Promotions 2006 and John Tasikas

Heard: April 13, 2012

On appeal from the order of Justice Frances P. Kiteley of the Superior Court of Justice, dated August 29, 2011.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] We agree with Kiteley J. that neither Be There nor Mr. Tasikas is a necessary and proper party in this matrimonial litigation. The appellant does not seek an interest in Be There. She seeks only a monetary equalization payment. The proposed added parties are not needed to adjudicate that issue.

[2] Because of our conclusion on this ground, we do not have to address the applicability of the limitation period.

[3] The appeal is dismissed with costs of $6,000, inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes payable to Be There and Mr. Tasikas