Scott Hamilton

The applicants brought an application and a motion for an injunction against their neighbours and the Town of Oakville regarding the construction of a retaining wall between their properties.

The applicants abandoned the injunction motion shortly before the hearing.

At the hearing of the application, the court found that the material facts regarding liability, encroachment, and damages were highly disputed and could not be resolved on a paper record.

The court dismissed the application and ordered the matter to proceed to trial.

The applicants were ordered to pay partial indemnity costs for the abandoned injunction motion.

The plaintiff tenant sued the defendant landlord for wrongful termination of a commercial month-to-month tenancy and conversion of its manufacturing equipment and goods.

The landlord locked out the tenant without the required written notice and subsequently disposed of the tenant's property.

The court found the landlord liable for conversion and awarded damages based on the fair market value of the lost equipment and goods, plus punitive damages for the landlord's egregious conduct, less arrears for rent and hydro.

The plaintiffs brought a motion under Rule 30.04(5) of the Rules of Civil Procedure seeking early production of documents held by a municipal employer relating to a complaint and investigation that allegedly led to the plaintiff’s employment termination.

The documents were said to be necessary to properly plead claims including defamation and negligent investigation.

The municipality resisted production prior to the close of pleadings while also indicating an intention to bring a Rule 21 motion to strike the claim.

The court held that the requested documents were essential to allow the plaintiffs to properly plead their causes of action and respond to a demand for particulars.

Early production was ordered to ensure fairness and avoid prejudice where the responding party controlled the key documents.