Davis v. Guelph (City)

Davis v. Guelph (City)

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because it was filed well beyond the appeal period, earlier attempts to extend time had been unsuccessful, and no fresh evidence or exceptional circumstances were presented to justify interference, with the applicant's traffic delay explanation accepted but...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 ONCA 357
Parties
Appellant: Erica Davis; Respondent: The Corporation of the City of Guelph
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (municipal by Law/regulatory Offences) / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Motions to Extend Time and Motion to Set Aside Convictions (endorsement)
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, Motion to Set Aside Convictions, Failure to Appear, Fresh Evidence
Source Language
en
Municipal Law Administrative Law Procedure for Regulatory/offence Appeals Leave to Appeal Extension of Time Motion to Set Aside Convictions Failure to Appear Fresh Evidence

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Erica Davis

Appellant

The Corporation of the City of Guelph

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (municipal by Law/regulatory Offences) / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Motions to Extend Time and Motion to Set Aside Convictions (endorsement)

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted despite being beyond the appeal period
  2. 2 Whether the time for appeal should be extended
  3. 3 Whether there is fresh evidence warranting interference with convictions

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because it was filed well beyond the appeal period, earlier attempts to extend time had been unsuccessful, and no fresh evidence or exceptional circumstances were presented to justify interference, with the applicant's traffic delay explanation accepted but insufficient.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed.