Who is Philip Stanley Chandler?

Philip Stanley Chandler is an Ontario lawyer (In Private Practice) with 3 court cases on record from 2016 to 2023.

What courts has Philip Stanley Chandler appeared in?

Philip Stanley Chandler has appeared in Superior Court of Justice, Court of Appeal, with most appearances at the Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Philip Stanley Chandler handled?

Philip Stanley Chandler has 3 cases on record from 2016 to 2023.

What judges has Philip Stanley Chandler appeared before?

Philip Stanley Chandler has most frequently appeared before Justice Eileen E. Gillese, Justice Jill M. Copeland, Justice Mary Lou Benotto.

Philip Stanley Chandler

3 total

Lozon v. Lozon, 2023 ONCA 645

This appeal concerned the enforceability of Minutes of Settlement signed by family members to resolve three lawsuits involving property and personal injury claims.

The lower court dismissed motions to enforce the settlement, finding a misunderstanding regarding specific equipment (a tractor and snowmobiles) based on subjective intentions.

The Court of Appeal found that the motion judge erred in principle by relying on subjective evidence rather than an objective interpretation of the contract.

Applying principles of contractual interpretation, the Court clarified the terms for the tractor (correcting a typographical error) and snowmobiles, concluding that a valid agreement existed.

ONCAOct 3, 2023

Respondent Counsel

Dirm 2010 Inc. v Prestressed Systems Incorporated, 2017 ONSC 3687

Dirm 2010 Inc. was substantially successful in a construction lien trial, recovering over $1.3 million.

This decision addresses the issue of costs.

The court, Master C. Albert, fixed costs on a partial indemnity scale, considering factors such as the principle of indemnity, reasonable expectation of the payor, complexity, importance of issues, and proportionality.

Dirm's failure to make a formal settlement offer under Rule 49 resulted in a $6,000 deduction from the awarded costs.

The court also adjusted counsel's hourly rates, reduced the time claimed for a junior lawyer due to excessive docketed time as a student, and disallowed costs for two lawyers attending trial.

Costs were fixed at $354,151.19 payable by Prestressed Systems Incorporated to Dirm 2010 Inc.

SCJJun 14, 2017

Respondent Counsel

Al Bidery v Cazzola, 2016 ONSC 3126

The defendants brought a motion to remove the plaintiffs' counsel, Greg Monforton and Partners, due to an alleged conflict of interest.

The child plaintiff, Sora Al Bidery, was represented by the firm, as were her parents, Amir Al Bidery and Amal Karim, who were also named as defendants by counterclaim for negligent supervision.

The court found an inherent conflict of interest based on the duties of loyalty and confidentiality.

The plaintiffs' counsel had taken positions on behalf of the parents that were adverse to the child's interests and had not obtained informed consent from all parties regarding the conflict.

The motion was granted, and the plaintiffs' counsel was removed from the record for all three plaintiffs.

Applicant Counsel