S. Johnson is an Ontario lawyer with 3 court cases on record from 2022 to 2023.

What courts has S. Johnson appeared in?

S. Johnson has appeared in Court of Justice, Superior Court of Justice, with most appearances at the Court of Justice.

How many cases has S. Johnson handled?

S. Johnson has 3 cases on record from 2022 to 2023.

What judges has S. Johnson appeared before?

S. Johnson has most frequently appeared before Justice Joseph De Filippis, Justice Ian R. Smith.

S. Johnson | Lawyer

3 total

R. v. N.C., 2023 ONCJ 83

The defendant, a young person, was charged with sexually assaulting and choking a young woman.

The central issue was the credibility and reliability of the complainant's and defendant's testimonies, particularly concerning an "apology conversation" via Snapchat.

The defendant claimed consensual sex and that his apology was for bringing another friend along, while the complainant asserted non-consensual sexual activity.

The court found the defendant's explanation for the apology unpersuasive and accepted the complainant's account, despite minor inconsistencies in her testimony regarding non-remarkable details.

The defendant was found guilty as charged.

ONCJFeb 21, 2023

Applicant Counsel

R. v. Knuff, 2023 ONCJ 73

The defendant pleaded guilty to unlawfully killing a pet dog, contrary to section 445(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.

The Crown sought a six-month jail sentence and a 20-year animal ban, while the defence argued for time served or a conditional sentence.

The court accepted the Crown's position, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence due to the seriousness of the offence, the element of planning, and the domestic context, despite the defendant's financial stress and difficult custody conditions.

The court imposed an additional 75 days of incarceration, resulting in an effective six-month sentence, followed by one year of probation and a 20-year animal prohibition.

ONCJFeb 10, 2023

Applicant Counsel

Estate of James Freure et al v. Terracon Underground Ltd. et al, 2022 ONSC 1591

The plaintiffs brought a motion to set aside a Registrar's order dismissing their action for delay, which arose from a 2011 property flood.

The court applied the four-factor test from Reid v. Dow Corning Corp., assessing the explanation for delay, inadvertence in missing the deadline, promptness of the motion, and prejudice to the defendants.

The court found significant unexplained delays by both plaintiffs and their counsel, that the missed deadline was not mere inadvertence, and that the motion to set aside was not promptly brought.

Crucially, the defendants suffered actual prejudice due to the death of a key plaintiff (James Freure) and the dementia of another (Fae Freure), which prevented full discoveries and expert examinations, and resulted in the loss of relevant medical records.

The court dismissed the motion to set aside the dismissal, emphasizing the need for finality in litigation.

A separate motion to appoint Catherine Chapman as litigation guardian for Fae Freure was granted.

Respondent Counsel