SCJ 2025

The court considered whether a retroactive child support award should be made against the father, Mark Thompson, for the years 2014 to 2023, in light of his failure to comply with annual financial disclosure obligations under a Parenting Agreement.

The court found that the father had not provided proper disclosure and had misled the mother, Vanessa Sorrenti, about his income, resulting in underpayment of child support.

The court ordered retroactive child support to be paid from January 1, 2014, and denied both parties' claims for contributions toward childcare and private tuition costs, finding both had failed in their disclosure obligations.

Pre-judgment interest was not awarded.

The decision concerns the admissibility and sufficiency of evidence in a prosecution for firearms and drug offences.

The accused, Hussein Al Hayawi, was stopped by police and found in possession of drugs and firearms.

The court considered whether the accused had knowledge and control over the firearms, ammunition, and cannabis found in the trunk of the vehicle, and whether the cannabis was possessed for the purpose of selling.

The court found the accused guilty on all remaining counts, concluding that the circumstantial evidence established knowledge and control beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court granted default judgment in favour of the plaintiff, Izhak Aliasi-Sini, against Samir Arora and Equinox Arora Realty Inc. for breach of contract arising from a failed real estate transaction.

The court found that the defendants, having been noted in default, were deemed to admit the facts pleaded.

The plaintiff was awarded damages based on the difference between the original and resale prices, legal fees, and punitive damages, with a reduction for lower resale commission.

The court also awarded substantial indemnity costs and prejudgment interest, but declined to award prejudgment interest on the full purchase price due to lack of evidence.

The decision concerns Parkland Corporation’s motion for interlocutory relief to enforce negative covenants in a lease requiring Caledon Fuels Inc. to operate a gas station as an Ultramar station with fuel supplied by Parkland.

The court grants Parkland leave to register a certificate of pending litigation (CPL) and issues an injunction against Caledon and the purchaser, 16408117 Canada Inc., from breaching the lease.

The ruling addresses the legal tests for a CPL and interlocutory injunction, the effect of actual notice of a lease under the Land Titles Act, and the balance of convenience between the parties.

The court dismissed summary judgment motions brought by the defendants in a personal injury action arising from an assault during a recreational hockey tournament.

The plaintiffs alleged negligence and statutory liability against the arena owner, tournament organizer, and bar operator, following an assault by a player who had been drinking.

The court found that genuine issues requiring a trial remained, particularly regarding foreseeability, standard of care, and the state of the evidentiary record.

The decision reviews the legal principles for summary judgment, the duties of commercial hosts and organizers, and the need for a full trial to resolve disputed facts and credibility.

The court dismissed two actions by will beneficiaries against the drafting lawyer for negligence, holding that the claims were statute-barred by the 15-year ultimate limitation period in section 15(2) of the Limitations Act, 2002.

The court found that the limitation period began to run from the date of the negligent drafting, not the testator’s death, and that no statutory or common law exception applied.

The court also addressed the application of the Trustee Act and concluded that the two-year limitation period for estate claims did not revive or extend the beneficiaries’ claims.

The plaintiff, Peoples Trust Company, brought a motion for a finding that the defendant, PSP Services Inc., was in contempt of court for failing to comply with court orders requiring cooperation with an audit and the deconversion process following the termination of their Acquiring Services and Sponsorship Agreement.

The court found that PSP intentionally frustrated and delayed the audit process, failed to comply with orders to provide documentation, and did not cooperate with the deconversion process.

The court found PSP liable for civil contempt, declined to appoint an investigative receiver at this stage, and reserved the issue of penalty and costs to a later hearing.

The court considered whether M.R. was guilty of sexually assaulting or sexually interfering with his daughter, C.R., when she was three and four years old.

The decision turned on the credibility and reliability of the evidence provided by both M.R. and C.R. The court found that M.R.'s denial could not be rejected, and that C.R.'s evidence was inconsistent and potentially tainted, failing to meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

M.R. was acquitted.

This costs endorsement follows the dismissal of a medical malpractice action brought by Frank Papineau against Dr. Pablo Romero-Sierra and Dr. Jonny Brisebois.

The court awards the defendants substantial indemnity costs of $957,893 after a seven-week trial, finding the plaintiff's claim was without foundation and that he made unsubstantiated allegations of dishonesty against Dr. Romero-Sierra.

The court rejects arguments that the action was public interest litigation or that costs should be denied due to the plaintiff's financial circumstances, emphasizing the importance of deterring unmeritorious litigation and sanctioning improper conduct.

This decision concerns a motion to change a parenting order under the Children's Law Reform Act.

The court finds a material change in circumstances since the original order, including ongoing conflict, family violence, and the child's exposure to harm.

The mother is granted sole decision-making responsibility and primary residence of the child, with the father receiving specified parenting time.

The court also addresses child support, imputing income to the father based on available evidence, and sets out a detailed parenting schedule and related orders.

The court considered an application by Foodies Curry & Shawarma Inc. for specific performance and injunctive relief regarding an aborted agreement for the sale of restaurant assets to Royal Paan Leasing Ltd. The court dismissed the claims for specific performance and injunctive relief, finding that Foodies breached the agreement by failing to deliver unencumbered chattels or provide the required undertakings.

However, the court granted relief for unjust enrichment, ordering payment of the agreed purchase price through an escrow arrangement to ensure discharge of the remaining encumbrance.

This decision addresses the jurisdiction of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to order increased compensation for jurors in lengthy criminal jury trials, above the statutory minimums set by regulation.

Justice Skarica reviews the constitutional and historical importance of jury trials, the inadequacy of current compensation, and the inherent jurisdiction of the court to ensure a fair and representative jury.

The court orders increased daily compensation for jurors, as well as improved provision of snacks and meals, to ensure the effective functioning of the jury system and the fair administration of justice.

This decision concerns the allocation of costs following the settlement of a multi-party action arising from a 2011 boating accident.

The only remaining issue was the amount of costs payable to the plaintiffs.

The court awarded $146,091.74 in costs, inclusive of disbursements and HST, finding this amount fair and reasonable.

The court declined to award a premium or substantial indemnity costs, finding no basis for such an award in the circumstances, and emphasized the importance of reasonableness and the discretion of the court in costs matters.

The court sentenced Pritpal Singh for trafficking and possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking, possession of opium, and possession of proceeds of crime.

The case involved a Garofoli application regarding the excision of unconstitutionally obtained evidence from an Information to Obtain (ITO), which was dismissed.

The court reviewed the applicable sentencing ranges for large-scale heroin trafficking, considered aggravating and mitigating factors, and imposed a global sentence of 13 years, with all sentences to run concurrently.

The decision concerns a motion for summary judgment by the landlord, Parvaneh Ansari Ardabili, against tenants Norman J. Zak and Adina Zak for unpaid rent, utilities, and damages to a residential property.

The court found that the Superior Court had jurisdiction, that the tenants owed $40,250 in unpaid rent at the original lease rate, and awarded additional amounts for utilities and damages, plus costs.

The court clarified the application of the Residential Tenancies Act regarding rent increases and the effect of not challenging increases within the statutory period.

This decision concerns the costs arising from an application to enforce Letters Rogatory in a class action context.

The Applicants sought production of source code and deposition from Modiface Inc., a non-party to the underlying U.S. litigation.

The court ordered Modiface to provide compiled and obfuscated code and to submit to deposition, but limited the scope of production.

The decision addresses the appropriate quantum and basis for costs, ultimately awarding $150,000 all-inclusive to the Respondent, balancing the principles of indemnity, proportionality, and reasonableness.

The court dismissed John Cipolla’s appeal from a Small Claims Court order refusing to recognize a decision of the Alliance of Indigenous Nations (AIN) Tribunal.

The court found the appeal to be frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise an abuse of process under Rule 2.1.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, as the AIN Tribunal is not a recognized legal entity and there was no plausible basis for its decisions to be recognized by the court.

The court also rejected arguments based on international law and Indigenous rights, finding no statutory or legal authority for the AIN Tribunal’s recognition.

The Royal Bank of Canada sought summary judgment against Karen Lee Kerby for the balance owing on a Visa credit card account.

The court found that Kerby was an Authorized User, not a co-borrower, under the credit card agreement and therefore not personally liable for the debt.

The court distinguished the facts from prior case law and dismissed the balance of the action against Kerby.

The plaintiff, Blackstone Paving and Construction Limited, sought a stay of the defendant Town of Newmarket’s counterclaim, arguing that the Town’s failure to immediately disclose a settlement agreement with third party R.V. Anderson Associates Limited constituted an abuse of process.

The court found that the settlement did not materially change the litigation landscape or the adversarial relationship among the parties, and thus did not trigger an immediate disclosure obligation.

The application was dismissed, with costs reserved to the outcome of trial.

The plaintiff, Mohammad Mardani, sought default judgment against the defendants, Majid Torkashvand and Trust Realty Point Inc., for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation relating to a failed investment partnership.

The court found that the defendants were properly served, failed to defend, and that the evidence supported the plaintiff’s claims.

Default judgment was granted in the amount of $50,000, plus $4,000 in costs.

The court declined to award punitive damages.