Court of Appeal for Ontario

Citation: Hanna & Hamilton Construction Co. Ltd. v. Robertson, 2021 ONCA 660

Date: 2021-09-23

Docket: M52782 (C68707)

Before: Watt, Benotto and Trotter JJ.A.

Between:

Hanna & Hamilton Construction Co. Ltd.

Plaintiff (Respondent in Appeal)

and

Craig Ross Robertson, 2092637 Ontario Ltd. and Brenda Robertson

Defendants (Appellants)

Heard: In writing

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1] The appellants appeal the orders of Donohue J., dated September 29, 2020 and October 23, 2020.

[2] The orders followed the respondent’s motion in the Superior Court of Justice for a declaration that previous orders of the court survived the bankruptcy of the appellants.

[3] At the conclusion of oral submissions, the motion judge granted the relief sought as follows:

Based upon all of the materials before me, the very detailed submissions I am going to grant the order that is sought by the moving party and set out in the notice of motion, paragraph B, C and D. So those declarations are granted with respect to the writs of execution.

[4] The motion judge later granted costs to the respondent and declined to provide reasons for the order, or for the costs’ decision.

[5] Both parties ask this court to set aside the order.

[6] The reasons of the motion judge fail to disclose how she arrived at the conclusion, in fact or in law. They are incapable of meaningful appellate review and this constitutes an error in law: see R. v. Sheppard 2002 SCC 26, [2002] 1 SCR 869 at para. 28.

[7] The appeal is allowed and the orders of Donohue J. dated September 29, 2020 and October 23, 2020 are set aside and a new hearing is ordered before a different judge.

[8] In accordance with counsel’s agreement, there will be no costs of the appeal.

“David Watt J.A.”

“M.L. Benotto J.A.”

“Gary Trotter J.A.”