CITATION: Skyteam Travel v. Grewal, 2019 ONSC 4814
COURT FILE NO.: DC-19-0001
DATE: 2019 08 15
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – DIVISIONAL COURT– ONTARIO
RE: SKYTEAM TRAVEL AND TOUR INC. aka SKYTEAM TRAVEL & TOUR INC. (Plaintiff, Appellant) and HARLEEN GREWAL, GREWAL LAW OFFICE (Defendants, Respondents)
BEFORE: D. E. Harris J.
COUNSEL: Ranbir Mann, for the Appellant
R. Micheli, for the Respondents
ENDORSEMENT
[1] The appellant was late in perfecting an appeal from a small claims court decision and now moves for an extension of time. The extension is granted.
[2] The prerequisites for an extension were not gainsaid by counsel for the Respondents with the exception of the precondition with respect to the merits of the appeal. On this head, counsel for the Respondents made extensive submissions. It was apparent that he was taking full advantage of the opportunity to have the appeal dismissed before it had even truly begun.
[3] The Respondents’ position was misconceived. The hurdle on an extension motion with respect to the merits is exceedingly low and is met by the appellant here.
[4] Justice Van Rensburg recently wrote on the subject in Zeifman Partners Inc. v. Aiello, 2019 ONCA 451, 305 A.C.W.S. (3d) 468:
8 … the question is only whether there is “so little merit in the proposed appeal that the appellant should be denied [his] important right of appeal”: Duca Community Credit Union Ltd. v. Giovannoli (2001), 2001 24017 (ON CA), 142 O.A.C. 146 (Ont. C.A. [In Chambers]), at para. 14. Even where it is difficult to see the merits of a proposed appeal, a party is entitled to appeal and should not be deprived of that entitlement where there is no real prejudice to the other side: Denomme, at para. 10; Auciello v. Mahadeo, 2016 ONCA 414 (Ont. C.A.), at para.14.
9 … In general … motions to extend time to appeal to this court should not devolve into a full argument on the merits of the appeal or the litigation as a whole. It is not the place of a single judge on a motion to extend time, to consider the full merits of an appeal that only a panel of the court would have the authority to determine. It is sufficient to say in this case that even a cursory review of the notice of appeal and reasons for judgment make it clear that the proposed appeal is not so completely devoid of merit that the appellant should be denied his important right of appeal.
[5] The Respondents fail to meet this onerous standard. The motion to extend the perfection date is allowed and the date for perfection is extended to two weeks from the date of release of these reasons. Costs to the appellant in the amount of $1,000 all inclusive.
D.E. HARRIS J.
DATE: August 15, 2019
CITATION: Skyteam Travel v. Grewal, 2019 ONSC 4814
COURT FILE NO.: DC-19-0001
DATE: 2019 08 15
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: SKYTEAM TRAVEL AND TOUR INC. aka SKYTEAM TRAVEL & TOUR INC. (Plaintiff, Appellant) and HARLEEN GREWAL, GREWAL LAW OFFICE (Defendants, Respondents)
COUNSEL: Ranbir Mann, for the Appellant
R. Micheli, for the Respondents
ENDORSEMENT
D.E. HARRIS J.
DATE: August 15, 2019