Who is Suhaib Ibrahim?

Suhaib Ibrahim is an Ontario lawyer with 3 court cases on record from 2015 to 2018.

What courts has Suhaib Ibrahim appeared in?

Suhaib Ibrahim has appeared in Superior Court of Justice, Court of Appeal, with most appearances at the Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Suhaib Ibrahim handled?

Suhaib Ibrahim has 3 cases on record from 2015 to 2018.

What judges has Suhaib Ibrahim appeared before?

Suhaib Ibrahim has most frequently appeared before Justice Michael K. McKelvey, Justice Kathryn N.M. van Rensburg, Justice Alexandra Hoy.

Suhaib Ibrahim

3 total

Frankie Paul Corsi v. Sean J. Skanes et al., 2018 ONCA 661

The appellant appealed a motion judge's order dismissing his civil action as frivolous and vexatious under Rule 2.1.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The appellant had been charged with stunt driving and related offences under the Highway Traffic Act, resulting in the seizure of his vehicle for seven days.

He subsequently sued for $75,000 in punitive damages and $2,100 in travel expenses, alleging the seizure constituted theft without his consent or court order.

The motion judge found the claim had no legal merit and dismissed it.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal, finding the claim was incapable of success on its face and rejecting arguments that the seizure violated Charter rights or the property rights of the vehicle owner.

ONCAJul 24, 2018

Respondent Counsel

Mounce v Rae, 2017 ONSC 2288

The applicants sought court approval for a minor's settlement arising from a dog bite incident and the appointment of a litigation guardian.

The court approved the settlement and the litigation guardian appointment but found the contingency fee agreement between the applicants and their counsel to be unfair and unreasonable due to lack of clarity, non-compliance with regulations, and inclusion of costs without exceptional circumstances.

The court reduced the counsel's fee from the proposed 33% to 20% of the minor applicant's recovery, plus disbursements and HST.

SCJMay 30, 2017

Applicant Counsel

Nikolakakos v. Hoque et al., 2015 ONSC 4738

In a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident, the defendants moved to compel the plaintiff to attend a defence medical examination by an orthopedic surgeon.

The plaintiff agreed to attend only if the defendants disclosed counsel’s letter of instruction to the expert.

The court held that litigation privilege protects the instructing letter at the time the examination is arranged and when the expert report is served under Rule 33.06.

However, if the party later elects to call the expert at trial, the privilege is subject to an implied waiver and the instructing letter must be produced as foundational information relating to the expert’s opinion under Rule 53.03.

The plaintiff was ordered to attend the examination without disclosure of the instructing letter at this stage.

Respondent Counsel