Superior Court of Justice

The plaintiff, Tiffany Longarini, sued four lawyers for breach of confidence after a settlement email she sent was disclosed to the Crown in a related criminal proceeding.

The court found that the email was not protected by settlement privilege due to its content and the context of its use, and that even if it were, disclosure was justified by the accused’s right to make full answer and defence.

The claim was struck without leave to amend.

The applicant's pleadings were struck, and the matter proceeded as an uncontested trial.

The parties separated in 2015 and have one child, who has resided exclusively with the respondent.

The applicant had not seen the child since 2016 and failed to provide financial disclosure regarding his foreign business interests.

The court granted the respondent sole decision-making responsibility and ordered that any parenting time for the applicant be supervised.

Due to the applicant's failure to provide adequate financial disclosure, the court drew an adverse inference and imputed his income at $80,000 for child support purposes.

The court also valued the applicant's foreign business interests at $877,059 for equalization purposes.

A restraining order was granted in favour of the respondent based on a history of violence and her reasonable fear for her safety.

The plaintiff, Shelley Brown, brought a motion to compel the defendant, Security National Insurance Company, to produce a second representative from its Product Department for a further examination for discovery, and to answer certain refusals from a prior discovery.

The motion arose from a dispute over an insurance claim following the theft of Brown’s vehicle and the handling of her claim under a discontinued 5-Year Replacement Cost Solution endorsement.

The court found that the criteria for ordering a further examination were not met, as the existing representative had provided undertakings and the answers sought could be obtained without undue expense or inconvenience.

The motion was dismissed.

The court sentenced Fahmid Iqbal, a youthful first offender, for possession of a loaded restricted firearm contrary to s. 95(1) of the Criminal Code.

After a detailed review of the facts, mitigating and aggravating factors, and relevant case law, the court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day, to be served in the community under strict conditions, followed by two years of probation.

The decision discusses the principles of denunciation, deterrence, and rehabilitation, and the appropriateness of a conditional sentence in the circumstances.

The court considered costs following motions regarding possession of property and a certificate of pending litigation.

The Plaintiff sought full indemnity costs, while the Defendant argued for each party to bear their own costs or for a reduction.

The court reviewed the Bill of Costs, found the Plaintiff’s claim excessive, and awarded a reduced sum of $33,250, including disbursements, to the Plaintiff.

The decision discusses the principles for awarding costs, including contractual entitlements and the requirement that costs be fair and reasonable.

The applicants, Zoranna Drumonde and Nicholas Spellay, sought the removal of their sister, Rosalie Spellay, as estate trustee and the sale of the family cottage left by their late mother, Rose Anne Spellay.

The court interpreted the will, which intended the cottage to remain in the family, and found that the property should be treated as held in joint tenancy among the surviving siblings.

The court held that the applicants could force a sale under the Partition Act, and that the opt-out clause for a $5,000 buyout was a one-time option that had expired.

The court ordered the property to be listed for sale, with proceeds to be divided unequally in recognition of Rosalie Spellay’s contributions, and left costs to each party.

The court approved a class action settlement between Elias Faiz and Canadian All Care Inc. (operating as Canadian All Care College) regarding the college’s Diagnostic Medical Sonography program.

The settlement provides $1.4 million in compensation for non-tuition losses to class members, with a minimum of $450 per month of enrollment.

The court approved the settlement, the contingency fee agreement, class counsel fees and disbursements, the appointment of Verita as claims administrator, and the notice plan, but declined to award an honorarium to the representative plaintiff, Faiz, finding no exceptional circumstances.

The decision reviews the legal principles for settlement approval, contingency fees, and honoraria in class actions.

The representative plaintiffs, on behalf of a class of Ontario franchisees, sought production of documents from the defendants (Shoppers Drug Mart Inc. and Shoppers Drug Mart (London) Ltd.) to support a “bottom-up” damages assessment for individual class members under section 25 of the Class Proceedings Act, 1992.

The Court of Appeal had previously found Shoppers liable for breach of contract and duty of good faith, and ordered that damages be determined through an individual issues process.

The defendants opposed production on grounds of proportionality, prematurity, and lack of expert evidence.

Justice Glustein granted the motion, ordering production of the requested documents for all class members subject to the 2002 Associate Agreement for the relevant years, finding the request reasonable and proportionate in light of the litigation’s scope and the evidence before the court.

Cette décision porte sur une motion du père intimé visant à exercer son temps parental avec les trois enfants du mariage en Suisse durant l’été 2025.

La mère s’oppose à ce que le père ait dix jours consécutifs de temps parental et propose des conditions alternatives, notamment le retour quotidien des enfants.

Le tribunal analyse l’intérêt supérieur des enfants, la répartition des frais de voyage, la question de la résidence habituelle, et les garanties de sécurité.

L’ordonnance accorde au père dix jours consécutifs de temps parental en Suisse, avec partage des frais et diverses conditions logistiques et de sécurité.

The court found S.A. guilty of sexual interference and sexual assault against his niece, D.D., who was four years old at the time of the alleged incident.

The decision turned on the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s evidence, which the court found to be internally consistent, age-appropriate, and corroborated by peripheral evidence.

The court rejected the defendant’s denial as not credible and found that the complainant’s one instance of fabrication did not undermine her overall reliability.

The verdict was based on a careful application of the reasonable doubt standard and the law on assessing the evidence of child witnesses.

The applicant, Harry Littler, a director of CMC Credit Ltd., sought an order compelling the respondents to provide access to CMC’s books and records, including loan agreements.

The respondent, Michael Smith, objected on the basis of privacy legislation (PIPEDA) and alleged improper purpose.

The court found that directors have an unconditional statutory right to inspect corporate records under the Ontario Business Corporations Act, and that PIPEDA does not prevent such access.

The application was granted, and costs were fixed in favour of the applicant.

The court granted Jason Allison's motion for production of financial documents from CMC Consumer Credit Limited, CMC Capital Inc., and Michael Smith.

Allison was found entitled to the documents as a shareholder under a Shareholders’ Agreement, as a trust beneficiary, or as an intended director.

The court rejected the defendants’ arguments regarding clean hands, limitation periods, and the status of Allison as a defaulting or beneficial shareholder.

The court also fixed costs in Allison’s favour.

The plaintiff, Plainview Heights Property Ltd., brought a motion for default judgment against the defendants, Moreom Khatun and Rehan Uddin, following a failed real estate transaction.

The defendants were noted in default after failing to defend the proceeding.

The court reviewed the requirements for default judgment, including the need for evidence supporting unliquidated damages.

The court found liability established but adjourned the motion to allow the plaintiff to file further evidence regarding damages and mitigation.

The court sentenced Chawn Lemieux for second-degree murder following a public shooting in Ottawa.

The decision reviews the statutory and case law considerations for setting the period of parole ineligibility, including the nature and circumstances of the offence, the character of the offender, jury recommendations, and victim impact statements.

After reviewing comparable case law, the court imposed a life sentence with 16 years of parole ineligibility, emphasizing the aggravating factors of public danger, prior record, and use of a firearm, while also considering Lemieux’s youth, difficult upbringing, and prospects for rehabilitation.

The court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and related economic torts arising from the formation of Icon Plumbing and the departure of key personnel from Riva Plumbing.

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove that the defendants competed unlawfully, misused confidential information, or caused any compensable loss.

The counterclaim for unpaid bonuses by Mike Ladisa and Joseph Ferrari was allowed, with damages awarded in the agreed amount plus interest.

The court sentenced Isaac Talbot-Hall for manslaughter after he pleaded guilty to stabbing Shawn Newsome in Thunder Bay.

The decision reviews the facts, the impact on the victim’s family, the positions of Crown and defence, the offender’s background, and the aggravating and mitigating factors.

The court considered the harsh conditions of pre-sentence custody and applied a reduction to the sentence.

The final sentence was ten years, reduced by one-half year for harsh conditions and by 1,400 days for pre-sentence custody, with additional ancillary orders.

The court sentenced Spiro Tsakopoulos for manslaughter after a guilty plea, following the shooting death of Bryson Murle.

The sentencing reasons review the circumstances of the offence, the impact on the victim’s family, the offender’s background, and the aggravating and mitigating factors.

The court found the case fell within the mid-range for manslaughter with a firearm and imposed a 10-year sentence before credit for pre-sentence custody, with appropriate statutory orders.

The court considered a claim by Country Wide Homes Upper Thornhill Estates Inc. against Xiaowan Liu for breach of an agreement of purchase and sale (APS) for a luxury home.

Liu failed to close the transaction, alleging language barriers and misrepresentation regarding environmental issues and a Certificate of Property Use (CPU).

The court found that Liu was an experienced purchaser, had the assistance of a real estate agent, and received all required disclosures, including the CPU.

The court held that the plaintiff met its disclosure obligations under the Environmental Protection Act and that Liu was liable for the shortfall on resale and carrying costs, totaling $741,999.

The counterclaim was dismissed.

The decision concerns the trial of T.D., who was charged with sexual offences against two complainants, H.M. and E.C. The court reviews the evidence of both complainants, the accused, and other witnesses, and applies the law regarding credibility, collusion, and similar fact evidence.

The court finds the accused guilty of sexual offences against E.C. but not guilty regarding H.M., due to concerns about H.M.'s credibility and inconsistencies in her evidence, including a statement suggesting a motive to fabricate.

The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the law on credibility, delayed disclosure, demeanor, motive to fabricate, and the use of similar fact evidence.

The plaintiff, Zitia Developments (2010) Inc., brought a motion for a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) on a property registered in the name of the defendant, Paul Halyk.

The plaintiff claimed beneficial ownership of the property, alleging it was purchased in trust for the corporation as part of a larger land assembly for commercial development.

The court found that the plaintiff established a triable interest in the land based on evidence of funding the downpayment and carrying costs.

Applying the Dhunna factors, the court concluded it was just and equitable to grant the CPL, noting the property's integration with the assembled lands and the risk of the plaintiff's claim becoming moot if the property were sold.