Nemmour c. Toronto (City)
The trial judge correctly found as a fact that the site belonged to the City and that the appellant was not authorized to place his belongings there, and accordingly the City had the authority to remove and destroy those belongings; there was no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual findings, so...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2017 ONCA 377
- Parties
- Appellant: Mohamed Nemmour; Respondent: City of Toronto; Respondent: Ed Sparling; Respondent: Gord Tanner
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 May 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Superior Court of Justice (judgment Dated 8 February 2016)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Ownership of Land, Unauthorized Occupation, Removal and Destruction of Property, Standard of Review for Factual Findings
- Source Language
- fr
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mohamed Nemmour
Appellant
City of Toronto
Respondent
Ed Sparling
Respondent
Gord Tanner
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Superior Court of Justice (judgment Dated 8 February 2016)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the site occupied by the appellant belonged to the City of Toronto
- 2 Whether the appellant was authorized to place his belongings on the site
- 3 Whether the City had authority to remove and destroy the appellant's property
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge correctly found as a fact that the site belonged to the City and that the appellant was not authorized to place his belongings there, and accordingly the City had the authority to remove and destroy those belongings; there was no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's factual findings, so the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Nemmour c. Toronto (City) Collection Décisions de la Cour d'appel Date 2017-05-09 Référence neutre 2017 ONCA 377 Numéros de dossier C63067 Juges Rouleau, Paul S.; Pardu, Gladys I.; Roberts, Lois B. Sujet Civil Contenu de la décision COUR D’APPEL DE L’ONTARIO RÉFÉRENCE: Nemmour c. Toronto (City), 2017 ONCA 377 DATE: 20170509 DOSSIER: C63067 Les juges Rouleau, Pardu et Roberts ENTRE Mohamed Nemmour Appelant et City of Toronto, Ed Sparling, Gord Tanner Intimés Mohamed Nemmour, en personne Matthew Cornett, pour les intimés Date de l’audience : Le 1 mai 2017 Décision rendue séance tenante. En appel du jugement de la juge Andra Pollak de la Cour Supérieure de Justice, en date du 8 février 2016. MOTIFS DE LA COUR [1] En première instance, la juge a déterminé que le site occupé par l’appelant est un terrain appartenant à la Ville de Toronto et que l’appelant n’était pas autorisé d’y installer ses biens. [2] L’appelant reprend essentiellement les mêmes arguments devant nous. [3] La détermination que le site où se trouvait les biens de l’appelant appartient à la Ville est une question de fait. À notre avis, la juge n’a commis aucune erreur manifeste et dominante. La conclusion qu’elle a tirée que la Ville avait l’autorité d’enlever et de détruire les biens de l’appelant qui y étaient est bien fondée. [4] Pour ces motifs, l’appel est rejeté. [5] Il n’y aura aucune ordonnance de dépens. « Paul Rouleau j.c.a.» « G. Pardu J.A. » « L.B. Roberts j.c.a.»