Sean Edward Cumming

The appellants appealed an order confirming a deputy registrar's findings regarding the accounting of clinic funds, including OHIP billings and bank loans.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the deputy registrar's conclusions were supported by the evidence and authorized by the clarification order.

The appellant appealed an order refusing to set aside a consent order dismissing its action against the respondent.

The motion judge found that the appellant would not have consented to the order but for a misrepresentation, but refused to set it aside because the appellant did not demonstrate a genuine issue for trial or prejudice.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the motion judge erred in principle by expanding the test for setting aside consent orders.

The consent order was set aside.

The tenant of a commercial building operated a bar and sought to exercise an option to renew its lease.

The landlord refused to renew, alleging the tenant was in default due to continuous over-serving of alcohol, which resulted in intoxicated patrons causing disturbances, vomiting, and urinating around the building.

The application judge granted the tenant's application for a declaration that it had validly renewed the lease.

The Court of Appeal allowed the landlord's appeal, finding that the tenant was in subsisting breach of the lease covenants at the operative date for renewal.

The Court held that the landlord was not required to give notice of default to refuse renewal, and that the landlord's acceptance of rent waives forfeiture of the existing term but does not bar it from refusing the renewal.

The appellant appealed an order of the Superior Court of Justice.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario disposed of the appeal by issuing an order on the terms of the consent filed by the parties.

The appellant appealed a motions judge's decision finding that a solicitor acted for the appellant on the entirety of a single loan transaction and that the solicitor's receipt of $90,000 was on behalf of the creditor.

The Court of Appeal upheld this finding, noting the single mortgage commitment and letters of instruction.

However, the Court allowed the appeal in part regarding costs, finding no justification for the motions judge's award of solicitor and client costs.

The costs order was varied to party and party costs fixed at $5,000.

The appeal was otherwise dismissed with costs to the respondents fixed at $5,000.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of his action for damages for breach of an agreement of purchase and sale for a custom home.

The trial judge found the respondent was entitled to terminate the contract because a building permit could not be obtained for the appellant's non-conforming plans.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the breach of contract claim, finding no palpable or overriding error in the trial judge's conclusion that the appellant's insistence on non-conforming features caused the failure.

However, the Court allowed the appeal in part to order the return of the appellant's $20,000 deposit, as the agreement had been terminated.

The appellants appealed a summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent bank on its claim and dismissing the appellants' counterclaim.

The appellants argued the bank breached a duty by misrepresenting its willingness to review existing loans and advance additional funds for a subdivision.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no factual foundation or evidence of any such misrepresentation, and upheld the motion judge's conclusion that there was no genuine issue for trial.