Who is Philip Graham?

Philip Graham is an Ontario lawyer with 3 court cases on record from 2016 to 2018.

What courts has Philip Graham appeared in?

Philip Graham has appeared in Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Philip Graham handled?

Philip Graham has 3 cases on record from 2016 to 2018.

What judges has Philip Graham appeared before?

Philip Graham has most frequently appeared before Justice Cynthia Petersen, Justice D. E. Short, Justice Mills.

Philip Graham | Lawyer

3 total

Thompson v. Broeze, 2018 ONSC 4268

The defendant Canadian Hydro Developers (CHD) brought a motion to enforce Minutes of Settlement and sought a declaration on the property valuation date.

The plaintiff, Paul Thompson, opposed, arguing misapprehension of facts and that his former counsel acted without instructions regarding the valuation date.

The court enforced the main settlement but exercised its discretion to set aside counsel's agreement on the June 2014 valuation date, finding it unreasonable and entered into without the plaintiff's instructions, leading to clear injustice.

The valuation date was determined to be the date appraisals are conducted.

SCJJul 9, 2018

Applicant Counsel

Trindent Consulting International Inc. v. Logsdon, 2018 ONSC 1696

The defendant, a US citizen residing in Texas, brought a motion to stay the plaintiff's breach of employment contract action on the basis of forum non conveniens.

The plaintiff, a consulting firm with its head office in Toronto, hired the defendant to provide services globally.

The employment agreement specified Ontario law as the governing law.

The court applied the test from Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda and the factors from Young v. Tyco, finding that the defendant failed to demonstrate that Texas was a clearly more appropriate jurisdiction.

The motion to stay was dismissed.

SCJMar 13, 2018

Applicant Counsel

Mezin v. Her Majesty The Queen In Right Of Ontario et al., 2016 ONSC 5171

The plaintiff, Eric Mezin, brought a motion for further particulars regarding the defendants' statements of defence in a wrongful dismissal action.

The plaintiff alleged bullying, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation leading to his termination.

The defendants, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (HMQ) and Daniel Cayen, denied the allegations and asserted that the termination was justified due to performance issues.

The court, applying Rules 25.06 and 25.10 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, found that the particulars sought were necessary to define the issues, enable the plaintiff to plead a meaningful reply, and facilitate preparation for discovery, especially given the time limits on examinations for discovery.

The motion was granted, and the defendants were ordered to provide the particulars.

Respondent Counsel