Yuvraj S. Chhina

The moving parties brought a motion for leave to appeal the unreported decision of Kumaranayake J. dated December 31, 2024.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal without costs.

Following a successful application for the recovery of four leased trucks, the applicant sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis, alleging high-handed conduct by the respondents.

The court found the respondents' conduct did not warrant substantial indemnity costs and awarded partial indemnity costs.

The respondents were ordered to pay $36,658.08 in fees, plus taxes and disbursements.

The applicant, owner of four leased commercial trucks, sought an order for immediate and permanent possession of the trucks from the respondent towing company.

The respondent claimed a repairer's or storer's lien under the Repair and Storage Liens Act for unpaid towing services.

The court found that the respondent was neither a 'repairer' nor a 'storer' under the Act, as the towing was not connected to any intended repair service and there was no agreement for storage.

The respondent's possessory lien claim failed, and any non-possessory lien was unenforceable due to lack of written acknowledgment.

The court granted the applicant immediate and permanent possession of the trucks.

The plaintiff sought costs on a full indemnity basis following the resolution of two actions involving a loan for a car rental business.

The plaintiff had previously obtained a Mareva injunction and Norwich Orders after the defendants allegedly misappropriated the loaned funds.

The court found that the defendants engaged in reprehensible conduct by breaching court orders and attempting to resile from an agreement that the injunctions were properly granted.

The court awarded the plaintiff costs on a substantial indemnity scale, but reduced the quantum to account for duplicative counsel, unrelated claims, and the appearance that resulted in the settlement.

Costs were apportioned between the two sets of defendants.

The plaintiffs' motion for leave to appeal an order discharging a Certificate of Pending Litigation and setting aside an interim injunction was dismissed.

The defendants, as the successful party on the motion, sought costs on a partial indemnity basis.

The court reviewed the defendants' costs outline and found the claimed amount reasonable, ordering the plaintiffs to pay costs fixed at $3,852.87 within 30 days.

The plaintiffs sought leave to appeal an order that discharged a Certificate of Pending Litigation and set aside an interim injunction.

The original order was based on the plaintiffs' failure to make full and fair disclosure of material facts, including the assumption and refinancing of mortgages by the defendants, and misrepresentation of property expense payments.

The court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding no error in law by the motions judge and no matters of general or public importance to warrant an appeal.

The applicant trucking company sought a declaration that the respondent towing company was not entitled to a lien on its tractor under the Repair and Storage Liens Act.

The tractor was damaged in a collision while being towed by the respondent and was subsequently stored at the respondent's yard.

The court found the respondent was not entitled to a repairer's lien as no repairs were performed, nor a storer's lien as there was no agreed amount or evidence of fair value for storage.

The court ordered the respondent to release the tractor and directed a trial on the issue of unpaid towing and storage fees.

The appellant, a self-represented litigant at trial, appealed a Small Claims Court judgment ordering him to pay damages for a breached vehicle lease.

The Divisional Court found that the trial judge failed to properly consider a preliminary motion regarding a prior dismissed action and treated the appellant unfairly throughout the trial.

The trial judge repeatedly interrupted, made sarcastic and denigrating comments, and elicited irrelevant and prejudicial evidence.

The Divisional Court concluded that the cumulative effect of the trial judge's conduct gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, rendering the trial unfair.

The trial judgment and the underlying order reinstating the action were set aside.

The respondent Director of Employment Standards moved to quash the applicant employer's application for judicial review of four orders to pay, arguing the employer failed to exhaust its statutory remedies under the Employment Standards Act.

The employer argued that the Employment Standards Officer violated principles of natural justice and that it could not afford to pay the ordered amounts into trust as required for a statutory review.

The Divisional Court granted the motion to quash, finding that alleged natural justice violations do not constitute exceptional circumstances to bypass the statutory scheme, and that the employer provided insufficient evidence of financial hardship to justify an exception.

The plaintiff freight broker brought a subrogated action for $60,000 after a shipment of frozen food was lost in transit between Illinois and Ontario.

The plaintiff moved for summary judgment against the defendant carrier, Load Solutions Inc. The court found that the plaintiff had adduced sufficient evidence to prove the contract of carriage and the carrier's failure to deliver the goods.

The defendant failed to put its best foot forward or provide evidence to raise a genuine issue requiring a trial.

The motion for summary judgment was granted.