Condoman Developments Inc. v. Cannect International Mortgage Corporation, 2026 ONCA 237

Case Summary

The appellants appealed an order striking their pleadings for failure to pay an outstanding costs award of $260,500. They also sought to file fresh evidence and adjourn the appeal to advance an allegation that the underlying debt resulted from a fraudulent signature. The court held that the order under appeal was a discretionary decision and found no basis to interfere, particularly given the motion judge's history with the matter. It further held that the alleged fraud issue was not properly before the court because judgment had already been granted on that issue in an unappealed decision. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

DATE: 20260331

DOCKET: COA-25-CV-0999

Rouleau, Thorburn and Favreau JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Condoman Developments Inc., 1808176 Ontario Inc. and Howard Youhanan

Plaintiffs/Defendants by Counterclaim (Appellants)

and

Cannect International Mortgage Corporation*, Cannect Mortgage Investment Corporation*, Lookout Condoman Development Inc., Theodopolis Development Corp., 2638169 Ontario Inc., 2638170 Ontario Inc. and Marcus Tzaferis*

Defendants/Plaintiffs by Counterclaim (Respondents*)

Howard Youhanan, acting in person for the appellants

Matthew P. Gottlieb and Dantae Gagnier, for the respondents

Heard and rendered orally: March 26, 2026

On appeal from the order of Justice Edward M. Morgan of the Superior Court of Justice, dated June 25, 2025, with reasons reported at 2025 ONSC 3752.

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1] This is an appeal from an order striking the appellant’s pleadings for failure to pay a costs award in the amount of $260,500. This was an exercise of the motion judge’s discretion. In the particular circumstances of this matter and given the motion judge’s significant history with this case, we see no error in the motion judge’s exercise of his discretion to strike the appellant’s pleadings.

[2] Today, the appellant seeks to file fresh evidence to demonstrate that the debt is the result of a fraudulent signature. He seeks to adjourn the appeal to file further evidence in pursuit of his position that there was a fraud. The problem with this position is that Koehnen J. has already granted judgment to the respondents and the appellant has not appealed that decision: Condoman Developments Inc. v. Cannect International Mortgage Corporation, 2025 ONSC 4529. The issue of whether a fraud was perpetuated is not properly raised before this court in the context of this appeal. The appellant concedes he has made no payment on the outstanding costs award. The appellant has not raised any issues that would justify an adjournment or justify allowing the appeal from the motion judge’s decision striking his pleadings.

[3] The appeal is dismissed.

[4] We order costs payable to the respondents, in the amount of $25,000 all inclusive.

“Paul Rouleau J.A.”

“Thorburn J.A.”

“L. Favreau J.A.”

Condoman Developments Inc. v. Cannect International Mortgage Corporation, 2026 ONCA 237

Case Summary

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

REASONS FOR DECISION

Judges

Counsel

Parties

Areas of Law

Fact Patterns

Financial Outcomes

Issues