Scott v. Ontario
The Court agreed with the trial judge that there was no genuine issue for trial on malice; therefore summary judgment was properly granted and the claim against the respondents was dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C39193
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Ronald David Scott; Defendant: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario; Defendant: The Attorney General of Ontario; Defendant: Paul Culver; Defendant: Ann Morgan; Defendant: Toronto Police Services Board; Defendant: David Boothby; Defendant: Julian Fantino; Defendant: Alan Comeau; Defendant: Frank Wozniak; Defendant: Gary Giroux; Defendant: Dina Kalns
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 25 September 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment Order (application for Summary Judgment Granted by Cameron J. Dated October 30, 2002)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; summary judgment upheld and claim dismissed against respondents.
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Malice, Qualified Privilege
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ronald David Scott
Plaintiff
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario
Defendant
The Attorney General of Ontario
Defendant
Paul Culver
Defendant
Ann Morgan
Defendant
Toronto Police Services Board
Defendant
David Boothby
Defendant
Julian Fantino
Defendant
Alan Comeau
Defendant
Frank Wozniak
Defendant
Gary Giroux
Defendant
Dina Kalns
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment Order (application for Summary Judgment Granted by Cameron J. Dated October 30, 2002)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was a genuine issue for trial on the question of malice
- 2 Whether summary judgment dismissing the claim was properly granted
Ratio Decidendi
The Court agreed with the trial judge that there was no genuine issue for trial on malice; therefore summary judgment was properly granted and the claim against the respondents was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment upheld and claim dismissed against respondents.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Summary judgment granted; claim dismissed against the respondents
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Scott v. Ontario Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2003-09-25 Docket numbers C39193 Judges Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Moldaver, Michael James; Sharpe, Robert J. Subject Civil Decision Content DATE: 20030925 DOCKET: C39193 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: RONALD DAVID SCOTT (Plaintiff) - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, PAUL CULVER, ANN MORGAN, TORONTO POLICE SERVICES BOARD, DAVID BOOTHBY, JULIAN FANTINO, ALAN COMEAU, FRANK WOZNIAK, GARY GIROUX AND DINA KALNS (Defendant) BEFORE: ABELLA, MOLDAVER and SHARPE JJ.A. COUNSEL: Kim Twohig and Jim Smith for the defendant Sean Dewart and Charles Sinclair for the plaintiff HEARD & ENDORSED: September 24, 2003 On appeal from the order of Justice Donald R. Cameron dated October 30, 2002. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] We agree with Cameron J.'s careful analysis on the issue of malice. In our view, he correctly found that there was no genuine issue for trial on the question of malice. [2] Accordingly, we are satisfied that he properly granted summary judgment and dismissed the claim against the respondents. [3] The appeal is dismissed. Costs if requested.