Update: This decision was reversed by the Court of Appeal on December 3, 2008. Our thanks to Debra Rolph of LawPRO, who has notified us of a recent decision that did not find its way into CanLII (the Canadian Legal…
In Godoy v. 475920 Ontario Ltd., Mr. Justice Thomas R. Lederer considered whether the limitation period in s. 38(3) of the Trustee Act trumps the one in s. 61(4) of the Family Law Act. He held that it does. In…
In Zimmerman v. Royal & SunAlliance Insurance Company, Mr. Justice Barry Matheson agreed that an insurer was entitled to deny coverage under a homeowner’s policy where the premises had been vacant for about 65 days. The home had been damaged…
In Reaume v. Unifund Assurance, Justice Edward R. Browne was asked to consider the issue of “risk premiums” in an award of costs. Regular readers will recall that the Supreme Court of Canada said, in Ritchie v. Walker, that risk…
In Guay v. BHD Financial Group, Master R. Dash considered whether a limitation period could be extended on account of “special circumstances”. On the facts of the case, the motion to extend the limitation period was dismissed. But the Master…
Decision of Justice Kershman dated Aug 10, 2007.pdf Our office acted for the insured in what is, so far as we can determine, the first decision to consider whether a duty to defend was owed by an insurer whose policy…
It was a good day for Barry Percival, who had cast aside the defence hat that he usually wears and was acting for the plaintiff. In Sagl v. Cosburn, Griffiths & Brandham et al., an action by a policyholder against…
In Kramarz v. KMS Cardiology & Diagnostic Centres, Mr. Justice Thomas R. Lederer held that a negligence action against a cardiologist was brought out of time. The suit had been commenced under the Family Law Act by members of the…
Lau v. Bloomfield is the latest in a series of cases in which judges have taken lawyers to task for inadequate materials filed in support of motions for court approval of settlements. (See our previous discussions of Marcoccia v. Gill and…
In Giustini v. Poppa, Mr. Justice Thomas Lofchik dismissed a motion for summary judgment by Goodyear Tire and other defendants, who had argued that a claim against them was barred by the two-year limitation period in the Highway Traffic Act….