Contract Welding & Fabricating Inc. v. M.J. Jones, Inc.

Contract Welding & Fabricating Inc. v. M.J. Jones, Inc.

The Court of Appeal found the motions judge provided careful reasons, correctly applied the summary judgment test, properly weighed factors under s.106 when declining a stay, and exercised her discretion without error; there was no basis for appellate intervention, so the appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal the costs order denied.

Citation
C40124
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Contract Welding & Fabricating Inc.; Defendant (appellant): M.J. Jones, Inc.; Defendant (appellant): Melfyn John Jones
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Superior Court Decision on Summary Judgment Motion and Refusal to Stay Under S.106 Courts of Justice Act
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal costs denied; costs awarded to respondent.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Stay of Proceedings, Costs
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Collections Appeal Summary Judgment Stay of Proceedings Costs

Case Brief

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Contract Welding & Fabricating Inc.

Plaintiff (respondent)

M.J. Jones, Inc.

Defendant (appellant)

Melfyn John Jones

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Superior Court Decision on Summary Judgment Motion and Refusal to Stay Under S.106 Courts of Justice Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the motions judge properly granted summary judgment
  2. 2 Whether the motions judge properly declined to grant a stay under s.106 of the Courts of Justice Act
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal the costs order should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found the motions judge provided careful reasons, correctly applied the summary judgment test, properly weighed factors under s.106 when declining a stay, and exercised her discretion without error; there was no basis for appellate intervention, so the appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal the costs order denied.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal costs denied; costs awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Leave to appeal the costs order dismissed