Jaymat Limited v. Trichilo

Jaymat Limited v. Trichilo

The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge permissibly found the pre-note characterization of the advances was ambiguous, the promissory note was supported by valuable consideration constituted by antecedent debts together with forbearance and forgiveness of interest, and those factual findings were supported...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2025 ONCA 900
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Jaymat Limited; Defendants (appellants): Gianluca Joseph Trichilo, also known as Pino Trichilo also known as Joseph Trichilo, Pino Trichilo operating as Vivo Pizza and Pasta and Vivo Pizza Pasta Franchising Inc.
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Superior Court Summary Judgment Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Promissory Note Enforceability, Consideration, Summary Judgment Review, Procedural Fairness, Antecedent Debt, Presumption of Consideration
Source Language
english
Contract Law Commercial Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Bills of Exchange Promissory Note Enforceability Consideration Summary Judgment Review +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaymat Limited

Plaintiff (respondent)

Gianluca Joseph Trichilo, also known as Pino Trichilo also known as Joseph Trichilo, Pino Trichilo operating as Vivo Pizza and Pasta and Vivo Pizza Pasta Franchising Inc.

Defendants (appellants)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Superior Court Summary Judgment Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motion judge decided the case on a theory not advanced by the parties resulting in procedural unfairness
  2. 2 Whether the promissory note was enforceable against the appellants
  3. 3 Whether the appellants received valuable consideration for executing the promissory note

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge permissibly found the pre-note characterization of the advances was ambiguous, the promissory note was supported by valuable consideration constituted by antecedent debts together with forbearance and forgiveness of interest, and those factual findings were supported by the record and entitled to appellate deference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and summary judgment affirmed
  • Respondent entitled to costs in the amount of $22,000 inclusive of taxes and disbursements