Sarah J. Erskine

Following the dismissal of an urgent injunction application regarding a commercial tenancy, the respondent landlord sought costs against the applicant tenant and two of its non-party shareholders personally.

The court found that the 'person of straw' test was not met, as the applicant was the proper party to the lease dispute.

However, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to prevent an abuse of process, finding that the two shareholders engaged in gross misconduct by authorizing and funding the litigation while withholding funds from the insolvent applicant, thereby depriving it of the ability to pay rent or a costs award.

Costs were awarded on a partial indemnity scale, fixed at $29,405, payable jointly and severally by the applicant and the two shareholders.

The Applicant, Simcoe Drug Mart Inc., sought an urgent interlocutory mandatory injunction to reinstate its lease for a pharmacy premises after the Respondent, Simcoe Medical Clinic Inc. (SMCI), terminated it due to non-payment of rent and re-leased it to a third party.

The court denied the injunction, finding no serious issue to be tried as the Applicant's key hearsay evidence regarding an alleged scheme was struck, and the Applicant failed to demonstrate "clean hands" by retaining funds belonging to the pharmacy.

The court also found that the balance of convenience favored the Respondent and the new tenant, given the Applicant's financial instability and the public interest in a stable pharmacy.

The plaintiffs sought to schedule a motion to amend the title of proceedings following a previous decision.

The court scheduled the motion for November 27, 2020, and ordered that the plaintiffs may serve their motion material on the defendants by email, provided that proof of service includes particulars showing the defendants likely received notice through the email addresses utilized.

The appellant, Darlene Welton, appealed a trial judge's award of compensation for her services as Vice President of Marketing and Sales for Stonebrook Properties Inc., arguing it was inadequate on the facts and law.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the merits, upholding the trial judge's quantum meruit assessment of 1.5% commission for sales and dismissing claims for additional construction and warranty work due to lack of evidence or reasonable expectation of payment.

However, the Court granted leave to appeal the trial costs award, finding the respondents' last-minute settlement offer unreasonable and not in the spirit of Rule 49, and awarded the appellant her pre-trial and trial costs.

The corporate and personal plaintiffs sought default judgment against multiple unidentified defendants (identified by pseudonyms) for defamatory statements posted on an investment website.

The court addressed the novel issue of jurisdiction over unidentified defendants, affirming that judgment in personam can be granted if substituted service is reasonably expected to bring proceedings to their attention.

Damages, including general, aggravated, and punitive damages, were assessed individually against each defaulting defendant for each plaintiff, and substantial indemnity costs were awarded due to the defendants' abusive conduct in failing to respond.