William G. Dingwall

The appellants appealed a trial judgment finding that the 1996 exercise of a power of appointment was a fraudulent conveyance.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge's findings of fact regarding the appellant's complete interest in the property and the fraudulent nature of the conveyance were not open to challenge.

Costs were awarded to the respondents on a substantial indemnity basis.

The appellant previously established that the respondent lawyers breached their fiduciary duty to him, but a new trial was ordered to assess his personal damages.

At the retrial, the trial judge dismissed all damage claims because the appellant failed to prove direct personal losses or a causal connection to the breach.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the damages claims, agreeing that the evidence was insufficient.

However, the Court allowed the appeal in part to set aside the costs award against the appellant, finding that no costs should be ordered given the respondents' serious breach of fiduciary duty.

The respondent sought costs of the appeal on a substantial indemnity basis.

The Court of Appeal found the issues straightforward, with the only complication being the need for supplementary factums.

Costs of the appeal were awarded to the respondent and fixed at $10,000 on a partial indemnity scale.

The court also ordered that funds standing in court be paid out first to the respondent for trial and appeal costs, with any remaining balance to the appellant.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment regarding a real estate commission split, arguing the trial judge erred by admitting oral evidence that altered a written termination agreement.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the oral evidence was admissible to complete the non-exhaustive agreement and to establish the appellant's misrepresentation regarding the properties he was working on.

The court also dismissed the appeal regarding an alleged award to a non-party and upheld the trial judge's discretionary costs award.

The moving parties brought a motion to suspend the operation of a costs order made by the Court of Appeal.

Prior to the appeal, the moving parties had made a voluntary advance payment of $600,000 to the respondent.

The Court of Appeal had previously set aside the damages award and remitted it to the trial judge, while ordering the moving parties to pay the respondent's trial costs.

The respondent sought to enforce the costs award.

The Court of Appeal granted the motion under Rule 59.06, suspending the costs order and requiring the return of any collected funds, as the moving parties were entitled to credit against their advance payment until the final determination of damages.