Robert Karrass

The defendant brought a motion to set aside a default judgment obtained by the plaintiff in relation to the sale of a vending machine business.

The plaintiff had obtained an order for substituted service but failed to serve the complete statement of claim on the defendant.

Despite the defendant notifying the plaintiff's counsel of the incomplete service and requesting the full claim to file a defence, the plaintiff's counsel proceeded to note the defendant in default and obtained a default judgment.

The court applied the five-part test from Mountain View Farms and found that the motion was brought promptly, there was a plausible excuse for the default, the defendant had an arguable defence on the merits, the balance of prejudice favoured the defendant, and upholding the judgment would negatively affect the integrity of the administration of justice.

The motion to set aside the default judgment was granted.

The plaintiffs in two related actions sought an interim Mareva injunction against the defendants, alleging a fraudulent investment scheme involving the purchase and resale of used vehicles.

The court found a strong prima facie case of fraud, noting evidence of non-existent purchasers, missing funds, and the transfer of assets by the personal defendant.

The court granted the Mareva injunction in the standard form, rejecting the defendants' request for an adjournment and their proposed terms allowing discretionary withdrawals for living expenses and business operations.

Following divided success on multiple family law motions, both parties sought costs.

The mother sought full recovery of $73,845 based on an offer to settle, while the father sought partial indemnity of $10,971.

The court found that while success was evenly divided, the mother was entitled to some costs because two severable paragraphs of her offer to settle were as favourable as the order obtained.

The court awarded the mother $6,000 in costs, offset by her share of the costs for cross-examining an expert witness, resulting in a net award of $4,566.

The court also clarified a previous order regarding the father's spring break access.