Robert M. Thompson

The appellant appealed convictions for two counts of assault and one count of uttering threats against his elderly mother, arguing misapprehension of evidence, errors in credibility findings, and ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Summary Conviction Appeal Court reviewed the trial record and found the trial judge properly assessed credibility and reliability of witnesses and made no palpable error in her findings.

Applying the governing test for ineffective assistance of counsel, the court concluded that trial counsel’s strategic decisions regarding witness selection, evidence use, and cross‑examination were reasonable and competent.

The appellant failed to establish incompetence or a resulting miscarriage of justice.

The appeal from conviction was therefore dismissed.

In an application seeking judicial review of municipal resolutions restricting the applicant’s access to municipal meetings, property, and staff, the municipality brought a motion for leave to summons and examine its clerk as a non‑party witness after cross‑examinations on existing affidavits had been completed.

The court considered the criteria for admitting additional evidence following cross‑examinations as articulated in First Capital Realty v. Centrecorp Management Services Ltd. The municipality provided no evidence of the proposed testimony and offered no adequate explanation for failing to present the evidence earlier.

The court held that permitting the examination would effectively allow the municipality to split its case and repair deficiencies revealed during cross‑examination.

Leave to summons and examine the witness was denied.

In a civil dispute concerning the origin of perennial rye grass and damages related to a golf course, the court assumed case management of the proceeding.

The judge ordered that all future motions be brought before the same judge or with that judge’s consent.

A litigation timetable was imposed requiring expert reports on the grass origin and damages issues, mediation, a meeting of experts with a joint report identifying agreed and disputed issues, and a final trial management conference.

The court also directed that the third party action be tried together with the main action.

An uncontested divorce trial proceeded where the respondent failed to appear despite being served.

The parties had previously entered into a separation agreement requiring spousal support and child support, but the respondent paid nothing and later swore an affidavit agreeing to amended child support terms which he also failed to honour.

The court granted the divorce, ordered arrears and ongoing child support, and confirmed custody of the child with the applicant.

The court also directed the issuance of a support deduction order and ordered costs against the respondent.

The decision commented critically on the respondent’s persistent non‑payment and failure to engage with the proceedings.