Court of Appeal for Ontario

CITATION: Duhot v. Duhot, 2012 ONCA 474

DATE: 20120704

DOCKET: C55254

BEFORE: Laskin, Cronk and Hoy JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Beatrice Duhot

Applicant (Respondent)

and

Jean-Jacques Duhot

Respondent (Appellant)

COUNSEL:

Robert N. Kostyniuk, Q.C., for the appellant

Georgina L. Carson and Vanessa Lam, for the respondent

HEARD: July 3, 2012

On appeal from the order of Justice Frances P. Kiteley of the Superior Court of Justice, dated March 5, 2012, and on a motion to quash the appeal.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] The issue before Kiteley J. was whether paragraph 1 of the order of Backhouse J. dated June 10, 2011 was “temporary” of “final”. Kiteley concluded that the parties had consented to the jurisdiction of the Ontario court for all purposes and that Backhouse J.’s declaration of jurisdiction was a final order. We agree with the reasons of Kiteley J. and with her conclusion.

[2] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed

[3] The appellant’s proposed fresh evidence does not assist him and the motion to introduce it is also dismissed.

[4] In the light of our disposition of the appeal, the motion to quash is unnecessary, and is dismissed as abandoned.

[5] Ms. Duhot is entitled to her costs of the appeal, including the costs of the motion before MacPherson J.A., which we fix on a partial indemnity scale in the amount of $20,000, inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes.