Thomas M. Dunn

The plaintiff contractor brought a construction lien action seeking payment of the balance owing under a retail store construction agreement and various claimed extras.

The defendants counterclaimed for costs associated with incomplete or defective work and delay in project completion.

The court reviewed disputed extras and back‑charges arising from the defendants’ decision to complete portions of the project using their own workers as the completion deadline approached.

After assessing the evidence, the court allowed certain extras and some back‑charges while disallowing others, ultimately determining the net amount owing under the contract.

The court also held that the construction lien was timely filed and that the work constituted an improvement within the meaning of the Construction Lien Act, making the lien valid.

Following a lengthy family trial, the court determined costs on written submissions and found the responding party's disclosure failures and litigation conduct materially increased complexity and trial time.

The court declined to revisit prior costs awards and rejected the responding party's claim for personal compensation for business time.

Substantial indemnity costs were awarded to the moving party, but full indemnity was not granted because the conduct did not meet an egregious bad-faith threshold.

The court fixed pre-trial, trial, and post-trial fees and disbursements totalling $74,537.43 and characterized the costs as related to child support enforcement and collection.

Following a civil trial where the plaintiffs succeeded in obtaining judgment for a loan debt, the court addressed the issue of costs.

The defendant sought approximately $35,000 in costs, arguing that the plaintiffs’ litigation conduct unnecessarily prolonged and complicated the proceeding.

The court found that the plaintiffs had engaged in inappropriate conduct, including threatening correspondence, attempts to undermine the defendant’s professional reputation, and late disclosure of documents.

Although the plaintiffs were successful on the merits, the court held that their conduct justified a significant departure from the usual rule that costs follow the event.

Partial indemnity costs of $17,000 were awarded to the defendant and ordered to be set off against the plaintiffs’ judgment.

The applicants sought judicial review of the government's alleged failure to allocate adequate resources to fund treatment for autistic children, raising both administrative and constitutional arguments under ss. 7 and 15 of the Charter.

The Divisional Court declined to hear the constitutional arguments on a piecemeal basis, noting that a fuller record was being developed in related litigation (Wynberg and Deskin).

The court adjourned the constitutional issues pending the outcome of those cases and proceeded to hear only the administrative law issues.

The petitioner father brought a motion to terminate his child support obligations for his adult son and to rescind arrears.

The respondent mother brought a cross-motion for a declaration of arrears and a proportionate share of extraordinary post-secondary expenses.

The court found that the son was in full-time attendance at an educational institution for specific periods and reinstated the support obligation for those times.

The court fixed the child support arrears at $17,024 and ordered the petitioner to pay $13,639.50 for his 75% share of the son's extraordinary post-secondary expenses.

The appellant purchaser appealed a Small Claims Court judgment awarding the respondent vendor $6,000 in damages for an aborted real estate transaction and dismissing the appellant's third-party claim against her real estate agents.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's credibility findings or assessment of damages.

The court also held that the appellant could not rely on her own failure to pay the deposit to argue the agreement was null and void.

The Crown brought a motion to introduce evidence of the accused's discreditable conduct in a trial for sexual assault and unlawful confinement.

The proposed evidence involved prior incidents with the complainant, and a subsequent incident with a second complainant.

Applying the Handy framework, the court admitted the prior evidence involving the complainant, finding it highly probative of consent and animus, but excluded specific inflammatory details.

The court excluded the evidence involving the second complainant, concluding that despite its striking similarities, its highly inflammatory nature and prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value.

The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court judgment, arguing that the trial judge erred in calculating the date from which pre-judgment interest was owed on a $10,000 award.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, noting that the appellant failed to provide a transcript of the assessment hearing.

Without a transcript, the court could not review the trial judge's reasons for exercising discretion under section 130(1) of the Courts of Justice Act to alter the interest period.

The appellant appealed a Small Claims Court judgment ordering her to pay $3,184.59 to the respondent purchasers for defects discovered after closing a real estate transaction.

The defects included a cracked water pipe that the appellant had concealed, leaks in the swimming pool covered by a surviving warranty, and a missing pool pump that the appellant had stored without notifying the purchasers.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable or overriding error in the trial judge's findings of fact.