Superior Court of Justice

The plaintiff, Marper Holdings Limited, sought summary judgment to enforce a mortgage debt against Foxpark Development Corporation, Carl Strand, and John Strand.

The court found that the defendants had defaulted on a $2 million loan secured by a mortgage, and that the individual defendants were liable as guarantors.

The court also dismissed the defendants' counterclaim, finding it disclosed no cause of action.

Judgment was granted for the full amount claimed, plus interest and costs, and Marper was granted possession of the property.

The court considered a motion by Marc Castillo and Castillo HR Consulting Inc. to stay the action for abuse of process due to Peninsula Employment Services Ltd.'s failure to immediately disclose settlement agreements with three former co-defendants.

The court found that the delayed disclosure of these agreements, which required the settling defendants to cooperate with the plaintiff, fundamentally altered the adversarial landscape and violated the strict requirement for immediate disclosure.

As a result, the action was permanently stayed.

The court also addressed, in obiter, the obligations of the Independent Supervising Solicitor regarding the production and accessibility of electronic documents seized under an Anton Piller Order.

The decision addresses a motion by MGW Home Designs Inc. to restore a construction lien action to the trial list after it was administratively struck, and a cross-motion by Domenic Pasqualino to discharge the lien and dismiss an adjudicator’s order.

The court applies the Reid Factors to determine whether to restore the action, finds no abuse of process by MGW, and upholds the enforceability of the adjudicator’s order pending final determination.

The court also addresses the interplay between adjudication and lien proceedings, limitation period issues, and awards substantial indemnity costs to MGW.

The plaintiff, Royal Bank of Canada, sought summary judgment against the defendants for defaulted loans and enforcement of a mortgage.

The court found that the defendants did not dispute the debts but requested more time to pay.

The court held that there was no genuine issue requiring a trial and granted summary judgment in favour of the plaintiff, including substantial indemnity costs.

The judgment details the amounts owing under various credit facilities and the applicable interest rates.

This decision concerns an appeal under section 88.33(9) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, regarding the City of Ottawa Elections Compliance Audit Committee's refusal to order a compliance audit of a candidate's financial statement.

The court found that even a minor but substantive error in a candidate's Form 4 financial statement is sufficient to require an audit, and that the Committee erred in not ordering one.

The court ordered the Committee to appoint an auditor and clarified that the threshold for ordering an audit is low, focusing on transparency and accurate reporting rather than the magnitude of the error.

This decision approves a class action settlement and distribution protocol regarding predatory and unconscionable equipment lease agreements, including the registration of Notices of Security Interests (NOSIs) on consumers’ homes.

The court finds the settlement fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of the class, considering the risks of continued litigation, the insolvency of several defendants, and the benefits achieved, including monetary compensation, lease cancellations, and legislative reform.

The court also approves class counsel fees, disbursements, a Class Proceedings Fund levy, and an honorarium for the lead plaintiff.

The plaintiff, John Shane, sought damages from Ontario Aboriginal Housing Support Services Corporation (OAHS) for property damage caused by a fire in a rental unit leased to OAHS clients.

Shane claimed OAHS had orally agreed to cover all property damage caused by its clients, or, in the alternative, that OAHS was negligent in supporting the tenants.

The court found no oral contract existed, as there was no meeting of the minds or clear promise by OAHS to cover all damages.

The court also found no evidence of negligence by OAHS.

The claim was dismissed.

The court considered whether the assessment of costs following settlement should be conducted by an assessment officer or by a judge.

The plaintiffs sought to have the court fix costs, while the defendants argued for assessment by an assessment officer under Rule 57.04 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The court held that, as the matter settled before trial and the court had only a cursory knowledge of the facts, the assessment should be conducted by an assessment officer as contemplated by the Rules.

The court encouraged the parties to attempt to resolve costs without assessment if possible.

The court sentenced Ryan Kiteley for theft under $5,000 (as a lesser included offence of robbery), possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace, and four counts of failure to comply with probation.

The court considered the circumstances of the offences, the offender’s background, and the positions of the parties.

The sentence imposed was a global sentence of 435 days’ imprisonment (with 285 days’ credit for pre-sentence custody), followed by three years’ probation with conditions, and ancillary orders including a DNA order, weapons prohibition, and forfeiture.

The court emphasized the need for specific deterrence and public protection, given the offender’s lengthy record and risk factors.

The court granted default judgment in favour of Dawn Christine Spellman against her brother, Steven Mark Spellman, for breach of fiduciary duty as administrator of their late father's estate.

The decision details Steven's misappropriation of estate assets, failure to account, and disregard for court orders, resulting in an award of general and punitive damages, as well as costs, to Dawn.

The court also ordered that Steven's share of their mother's estate be used to satisfy the judgment.

This decision resolves a carriage motion between three proposed class actions seeking damages for investors in The Toronto-Dominion Bank, arising from alleged misrepresentations and failures to disclose anti-money laundering (AML) deficiencies.

The court concludes that the Parkin action is best suited to advance the class members’ claims efficiently and cost-effectively, considering the statutory criteria under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992.

The decision addresses the impact of late registration of a class proceeding, the legal framework for carriage motions, the comparative strengths and weaknesses of each action, and issues of funding and counsel experience.

This decision addresses a high-conflict family law dispute between self-represented parties regarding the best interests of two children, focusing on parenting time, decision-making, and child support.

The court reviews the parties' history, the impact of conflict on the children, and the application of the Divorce Act and Child Support Guidelines.

The court orders a detailed parenting and support arrangement, emphasizing the need to minimize parental conflict and prioritize the children's well-being.

This decision concerns a motion to change a 2016 final order regarding spousal and child support, and section 7 expenses, between former spouses Pasquale Giovanni Mancuso and Silvana Logullo.

Both parties, self-represented, sought various forms of retroactive and ongoing support, and each alleged the other had failed to disclose income.

The court declined to impute income to either party, found Mr. Mancuso owed retroactive child support and section 7 expenses (with interest), and ordered ongoing spousal support until 2031 per the original formula.

The court found both parties contributed to communication breakdowns but did not act in bad faith, and ordered each to bear their own costs.

The court considered whether an ante mortem statement by Emma Roy, made to Christopher Prieur two days before her death in a car accident, was admissible under the principled exception to the hearsay rule.

The Crown sought to admit the statement to show prior discreditable conduct by the accused, Kyle Trepanier.

The court found that the statement did not meet the threshold reliability requirement, as the circumstances did not negate the possibility of untruthfulness or mistake.

The application was dismissed.

The reasons for judgment in this case are not available at this time.

The court sentenced Douglas Bowley for arson and uttering threats, following a finding of guilt for setting fire to a house he rented and threatening the owners.

The decision reviews the facts, Bowley’s mental health and addiction history, the impact on the victims, and the applicable sentencing principles.

The court imposed a conditional sentence of 18 months for arson and concurrent 6-month sentences for uttering threats, followed by three years’ probation, emphasizing rehabilitation and the need for continued mental health support, rather than incarceration.

This endorsement addresses objections by John J. McAteer to the passing of accounts by the respondents as estate trustees for the estates of their late parents.

The court considers the applicant's entitlement to production of documents, especially those relating to corporations managed by the respondents as attorneys for property for their mother.

The court emphasizes the principle of fiduciary accountability and transparency, discusses proportionality in production, and addresses issues regarding interim distribution and mediation.

The court orders production of relevant documents (with a minor exception), declines to order an interim distribution or mediation at this stage, and directs the parties to cooperate on scheduling.